Upcoming "Spider-Man" Feature Film Pre-Release Discussion, Part 3 (Spoilers)

[The Penguin]

So where were we? Sam Raimi is out and (500) Days of Summer director Marc Webb is in. The fourth Spider-Man film will now be a reboot/restart, returning Peter Parker to high school.

SuperHeroHype.com: Sony Rebooting Spider-Man in 2012! (http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8976)

Names that have been batted about for Peter since that announcement (either via rumor or member speculation) include Twilight's Robert Pattinson, Summer's Joseph-Gordon Levitt and Zac Efron. Below the discussion continues...

Part 2 (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?t=234197)
Part 1 (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?t=190784)

[Gold Guy]

I have a feeling Zac Efron might take the role.. and in that case, a lot of people would gripe about how Disney ruined Spiderman. :shrug:As long as it isn't a musical, I don't see how Efron coul wreck it.

[Pepperidge]

I've heard rumors circulating that Robert Pattinson is being considered to play Peter.
I find it hilarious that after the reboot was announced, that was almost literally the first thing people speculated and panicked about.

[Rho]

As long as it isn't a musical, I don't see how Efron coul wreck it.
Because there are people who will just completely thumbs-down something because it has someone from Disney Channel in it.

[macattack]

Disney's marketed their child stars so much that people automatically blanche when these stars attempt to break into non-Disney fare, assuming the works they're in will be ruined FOREVER.

That's frankly ridiculous. Its the script and directing that determines whether a movie's good, not if an actor or actress was involved in Disney fare.

[DisneyBoy]

Case in point: Lindsay Lohan!

[KCJ506]

Case in point: Lindsay Lohan!

I wouldn't be against it if this was 2003/2004. Back when she was still hot.

[the greenman]

Yeah, her and Niki Cox would've made very good Mary Janes. The less acting the better.

[macattack]

Case in point: Lindsay Lohan!

That's different, she's not all right in the head. She has shown decent acting skill in the past (Mean Girls) so it's more or less the material's she's given rather than raw skill that's hindering her, along with, of course, her issues.

Shia Lebeouf is another Disney star who's shown quite a bit of skill too (although admittedly he hasn't really done an "artsy" film, in general he's done mostly crowd-pleasers).

Disney's stars may be saturated but that does not mean they lack talent. They may get swelled heads and such but that's not to say they're bad at acting. They wouldn't be in the shows/movies/music/whatever that made them famous at all if they lacked talent.

[Rick Jones]

Shia Lebeouf is another Disney star who's shown quite a bit of skill too (although admittedly he hasn't really done an "artsy" film, in general he's done mostly crowd-pleasers).
To be fair, I don't think stuff like Battle of Shaker Heights and Guide To Recognizing Your Saints really count as crowd pleasers.

[Spideyzilla]

I've heard rumors circulating that Robert Pattinson is being considered to play Peter.


I have a feeling Zac Efron might take the role.. and in that case, a lot of people would gripe about how Disney ruined Spiderman. :shrug:

If either of them are Spider-Man, (to quote Kevin O'Leary) I will sue Marvel and Disney into the Stone Age. That would be my nightmare.

[RonDrakenfan17]

Hey, I'd rather have Zac than Rob UGH!

[Silly McGooses]

...why is anyone worried about these things possibly happening

[macattack]

Personally, I want the discussion off of Disney starlets and back to what the movie could contain and what we all want the movie to contain.

How do you think a Marc Webb-directed Spider-Man could turn out (besides more than two songs from the official soundtrack getting played instead of 50s/60s tunes that aren't on the soundtrack)? That's what we should be discussing.

[TMC1982]

Yeah, her and Niki Cox would've made very good Mary Janes. The less acting the better.

Before of course, Nikki Cox ruined herself with bad cosmetic surgery (if you've ever seen her on Ghost Whisperer you'll know what I'm talking about)!:anime:

How Many Villains Does it Take to Ruin a Franchise (http://www.cracked.com/funny-3858-spiderman-4/)

[suss2it]

Before of course, Nikki Cox ruined herself with bad cosmetic surgery (if you've ever seen her on Ghost Whisperer you'll know what I'm talking about)!:anime:

How Many Villains Does it Take to Ruin a Franchise (http://www.cracked.com/funny-3858-spiderman-4/)
Cracked has a couple other articles about the Spider-Man 4 reboot.

Article 1 (http://www.cracked.com/blog/my-spider-man-4-script)

Article 2 (http://www.cracked.com/blog/how-hollywood-decided-to-reboot-spider-man-probably)

[DisneyBoy]

From the Cracked Article:

Just The Facts
1 - The most recent Spider-Man movie grossed nearly $900 million worldwide, despite being awful.
2 - Spider-Man 4 was set to have the same cast, and to be written by the guy who wrote the Wolverine movie.
3 - It was set to feature no fewer than three villains, the fatal number for a superhero franchise

Geez really? If the guy who wrote Wolverine was going to handle Spidey 4, then we ALL dodged a serious bullet. That movie was utter garbage.

Not that I agree that three villains means it'll suck. It'll only suck if you try to make each of the villains a big deal in the narrative. As much as I don't love Batman & Robin, I didn't mind the way they used Bane. Okay, yes - it wasn't really a good treatment for the character. Few of the Batman villains can be teamed up because they're all such individuals. But I do believe that plucking a less well-loved villain from obscurity and working them into a small supporting role can work very well. Case in point - Juggernaut. Yes, he's hardly "less well-loved", but honestly, there just wouldn't be time in an X-Movie to spend fleshing out his entire relationship with Xavier without stealing attention away from cooler villains. So using him in a reduced capacity but still making him shine worked.

That being said, if Spidey 4 used say...Carnage and rewrote him to suit the needs of the picture, along with the Lizard and the Vulture...yes it would have been crowded, but it still could have worked. It's all about how you divide narrative focus.

And maybe it helps that I'm not in love with these characters, and therefore would have less of a problem boiling them down to a simple 8 minutes of screentime if necessary.

... arrived in 2004 and somehow became one of the best-reviewed films of all time, according to its 94 percent positive rating on RottenTomatoes.com. That means it scored exactly the same as No Country for Old Men and The Dark Knight, and was considered by critics to be a better film than There Will Be Blood, District 9 and Inglourious Basterds. Many film experts say this proves that judging a film's worth by its RT score is retarded.

Ha! :) More from Cracked on the 8 (Pointless) Laws all comic book movies must follow:

Though neither of them can even come close to touching Peter Parker in Spider-Man 2, who reveals his identity to:

a) Harry Osbourne
b) Mary Jane Watson
c) Dr. Octopus
d) A subway train full of passengers

It was almost like that last season of Ellen where every episode was about her telling some new group of strangers that she's a lesbian. But remember: THAT WAS THE LAST SEASON OF ELLEN.

I never watched Ellen...but this is funny. I never realized just how many people found out his ID in the second film. LOL, how absurd!

[Master Moron]

Huh? Why are they rebooting Spiderman if the first three films were successful? Won't this just confuse people?

[The Penguin]

Huh? Why are they rebooting Spiderman if the first three films were successful? Won't this just confuse people?Where have you been? We've been talking about this since January 11, the discussion starts at the top of page 13 (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?t=234197&page=13) in the last thread.

SuperHeroHype.com: Sony Rebooting Spider-Man in 2012! (http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8976)

[Master Moron]

Where have you been? We've been talking about this since January 11, the discussion starts at the top of page 13 (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?t=234197&page=13) in the last thread.

SuperHeroHype.com: Sony Rebooting Spider-Man in 2012! (http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8976)

Have I really not been around since January 11? All right, maybe I've finally conquered my addiction to the internet! Or maybe I'm just spending all my time on other sites like tvbythenumbers or imdb. Oh well, substituting one addiction for another is progress, isn't it? ISN'T IT?!?

[Lelouch]

Where have you been? We've been talking about this since January 11, the discussion starts at the top of page 13 (http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?t=234197&page=13) in the last thread.

SuperHeroHype.com: Sony Rebooting Spider-Man in 2012! (http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=8976)

Caught in a web? (I kid, I kid)

Anyways, I actually wouldn't mind Efron in this role. His reputation has been a bit tarnished due to HM but in all honesty I don't think he would do a horrible job. Granted, the hair has to be cut. No spidey should have hair that long.

As far as villains...I still think they should introduce Felicia Hardy. IIRC she isn't supposed to show up until he is in college (though I dont read the comics so don't hurt me if this is wrong) but I don't think it would matter all that much if they introduced her now.

People keep mentioning Gwen, but what exactly is the point of her character? Would it just be an excuse to not re-use MJ?

[Spideyzilla]

Have I really not been around since January 11? All right, maybe I've finally conquered my addiction to the internet! Or maybe I'm just spending all my time on other sites like tvbythenumbers or imdb. Oh well, substituting one addiction for another is progress, isn't it? ISN'T IT?!?

No, you're addicted. Besides, where will we be if our fourm elders are leaving us? Nowhere, that's where!

[ToonFaithful]

I've stop posting on this thread for 3 weeks and now there's rumors about Zac Elfron will play the role of Spider-Man/Peter Parker? Wow, now they need to think about this one. If they choose Elfron then people will be ranting about Disney ruining Marvel. I really hope Joseph gets the role, I haven't seen him since Rookie of the Year. And now he's in movies like G.I. Joe, 500 Days of Summer, and maybe Spider-Man.

[underdog]

I really hope Joseph gets the role, I haven't seen him since Rookie of the Year. And now he's in movies like G.I. Joe, 500 Days of Summer, and maybe Spider-Man.

Wrong baseball movie, it's Angels in the Outfield.

[ToonFaithful]

Wrong baseball movie, it's Angels in the Outfield.
Oops, I get mixed up with the baseball movies.

[W.C.Reaf]

People keep mentioning Gwen, but what exactly is the point of her character? Would it just be an excuse to not re-use MJ?

You could say thing about any love interest that isn't MJ. ;)

For that matter why MJ? What makes her any different to any other love interest other than the, now defunct, marriage?

Gwen is Peter's first love, the cool blond to MJ's hot redhead, and Pete's near equal in the science fields. Not to mention she's the daughter of a police captain so that can bring her into conflict other than being Peter's love interest.

If they're going by the comics Gwen's death was what brought Pete and MJ together in a more serious relationship.

The only problem with doing a more comics based Gwen or MJ is that in the previous movies MJ was a combination of Gwen and MJ’s personalities and Gwen was acting more like MJ. I’d think the average movie goer would be confused by Gwen acting like MJ and MJ behaving like Gwen. ;)

[Michael24]

I certainly wouldn't mind see Joseph Gordon-Levitt get the part, but if the movie is going to have Peter back in high school, they might consider him too old to play the part.

[young101]

Well this is what I mentioned. actually what I thought they should do, but not as soon as I thought they would be doing it: the reboot. And hey, if they're rebooting the franchise, why not have Gwen? Why retread on raimi and tobey's movies by just having mj? Gwen would be a good step in the right direction if theyre redoing the movie series.

Edit: I wouldn't mind seeing felicia hardy since she was not done. This is a great opportunity to take the characters they never used from the previous movies. And using characters who showed up earlier in peter's life compared to the comics has clearly worked as shown in the spectacular spiderman.

And I see it pointless to name all these actors. I don't like any of them as the role of peter parker, even joseph levitt. Just cast an unknown! break them into the business!

[NewcomerDC]

Just cast an unknown! break them into the business!
Agreed because that would stop those pesky rumors of Edward Cullen or Troy Bolton from stepping into the red and blue tights. If the musical's still in the works, why not cast the actor that will portray Peter Parker from Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark.

[macattack]

I don't really care who's playing Peter Parker as long as the guy can act. I'd personally prefer an unknown, though, rather than someone who might be too old or might cause controversy that could damage the movie's appeal and potential.

As for what the movie could hold, I definitely think Gwen will be getting the focus here in favor of MJ. They could use Felicia as she hasn't appeared in the movies period too, she's definitely an option.

But also remember this is supposed to be based more closely on the Ultimate mythos than the traditional continuity. MJ definitely gets precedence in the Ultimate version for ten whole years (Gwen only JUST took the spotlight in the Ultimate Comics reboot). MJ in the Ultimate version is even worse off than movie MJ in a lot of ways, in fact she's basically Gwen Stacy with red hair. Gwen in the Ultimate Universe is a punk who has a good heart and treats Peter like a brother eventually . . . Before she gets devoured by the Carnage symbiote, and then gets resurrected/separated from the symbiote many issues later, with a nicer, kinder personality. MJ in the meantime has become Debra Whitman-lite.

It remains to be seen, though, how closely the reboot follows the Ultimate mythos. Raimi's movies didn't have much relation to the original comic in the end, so they could probably trade Gwen and MJ's places (punk MJ would definitely be a change) and no one would bat an eye.

[CyclonatorZ]

Not too happy about this reboot, considering that I actually liked Spiderman 3 (except for Venom and dancing-emo-Peter) and wanted to have the Raimi series continue. The fact that this happened because Sony keeps wanting to shove unfitting villians in doesn't help the matter, and with that kind of attitiude likely still prevalent, I doubt this movie is going to be that great. :shrug:



Gwen is Peter's first love, the cool blond to MJ's hot redhead, and Pete's near equal in the science fields. Not to mention she's the daughter of a police captain so that can bring her into conflict other than being Peter's love interest.


I thought Betty Brant was Peter's first love? Or are we just talking about major love interests, and not minor crushes? :confused:

[macattack]

I thought Betty Brant was Peter's first love? Or are we just talking about major love interests, and not minor crushes? :confused:

Considering the relationship with Betty Brant didn't last too long people don't consider it more than a fling at best. Especially considering that Betty's twenty-something and Peter's a high schooler. They can't really pair those two together (though the Spectacular cartoon had some fun with the concept for an episode before they had Aunt May put the kibosh on it).

Gwen was the first serious, long-lived relationship, and the fact it ended in tragedy probably helps keep it in people's minds.

As for unfitting villains, we'll soon see. Again, it largely matters how closely they adhere to the Ultimate mythos. Brian Bendis is attempting to become a consultant on the movie as this is HIS universe Hollywood wants to screw up, so I think faithfulness will depend on how much Bendis is involved, if at all.

The first villain was the Green Goblin, though it is a very DIFFERENT Goblin from the original continuity. It's a Goblin that has more in relation to the Hulk than the GG we all know. That might be enough to let them get away with using GG again. Other early villains include The Lizard, Doc Ock and Venom (Lizard and Ock are more familiar, Venom is again quite different), and Kingpin plays a massive role in the background and foreground throughout the story(whether Kingpin could be used, though, remains to be seen).

Black Cat is several years older than Peter (she's 25-ish), Daredevil and Elektra both have supporting roles. DD and Elektra aren't really options due to being tied up by Fox (unless Sony feels like giving Fox a small piece of the pie in exchange for using the characters) but BC definitely is.

[Peter Paltridge]

Yes, Gwen was Peter's original girlfriend, but that was when the characters were still establishing themselves. It's now a given that MJ is the Lois Lane of the S-M universe and Gwen is the Lana Lang. And how did you like Smallville wasting all that time with Lana? My attitude is, why should I care about Gwen if she's (A) not Peter's true love and (B) going to die?

[macattack]

Yes, Gwen was Peter's original girlfriend, but that was when the characters were still establishing themselves. It's now a given that MJ is the Lois Lane of the S-M universe and Gwen is the Lana Lang. And how did you like Smallville wasting all that time with Lana? My attitude is, why should I care about Gwen if she's (A) not Peter's true love and (B) going to die?

You can always subvert the ultimate destiny, like Spectacular Spider-Man did, where Gwen IS the true love, and she ISN'T going to die. Who says it has to be MJ in every retelling?

Not that I dislike MJ but as you can always retell Spidey one of the quickest ways to make a particular continuity stand out is to pair Peter with a different girl, be it Gwen, Felicia, Debra, Betty, etc.

[young101]

Wait. When was it said this was going to be based off ultimate? If my memory serves, is it because the Webb has read ultimate? Even though hes director, he wont writing the script, although he may influnce it.

[W.C.Reaf]

I thought Betty Brant was Peter's first love? Or are we just talking about major love interests, and not minor crushes? :confused:

Betty was his first girlfriend and Gwen was the first love. Pete's had lots of girlfriends but not many loves, MJ and Gwen are the only ones I can think of on the top of my head.

[ToonFaithful]

Betty was his first girlfriend and Gwen was the first love. Pete's had lots of girlfriends but not many loves, MJ and Gwen are the only ones I can think of on the top of my head.
I'm not a long die hard Spider-Man comic reader but didn't Gwen and Peter break up because her brother died? I haven't read them in a long time so correct me if I'm wrong.

Hopefully MJ can be a nice lady in the re-boot unlike Raimi's version. In Spider-Man 3 I thought she was selfish. "It's not about you, it's about me." I remember that. I don't read the ultimate version so if this is gonna be influenced by it then I may need to see it and start reading them.

[KCJ506]

Another problem with insisting on a reboot so chronologically close in release to the previously established franchise is that audiences expect a certain amount of escalation over time when it comes to films and studios have aided in getting audiences to perceive that through more of everything as a series progresses.

I have a feeling that with it being so close with SM3 in release date it will most likely come off as a downgrade since the previous set of films are still fresh in the minds of audiences.

[W.C.Reaf]

I'm not a long die hard Spider-Man comic reader but didn't Gwen and Peter break up because her brother died? I haven't read them in a long time so correct me if I'm wrong.

Betty's brother died because of a fight between Doc Ock and Spidey not Gwen. I don't think they broke up because of it (although I'm not sure).

Wiki does say they broke up a year after her brother’s death.


Hopefully MJ can be a nice lady in the re-boot unlike Raimi's version. In Spider-Man 3 I thought she was selfish. "It's not about you, it's about me." I remember that. I don't read the ultimate version so if this is gonna be influenced by it then I may need to see it and start reading them.

Ultimate is a good read and changes from regular continuity then you should enjoy it.

Until there's an official synopsis for the film then anything can happen in regards to the plot. They might only set part of it in high school or scrap that idea if they find a suitable actor that isn't in their age range. Since they haven't even started filming yet (let alone got any actors) it's impossible to tell what's going to make it into the film from the comics and what isn't.

[the greenman]

I think Efron is a no-no, but knowing Hollywood who knows. I don't think Efron is good cause it wouldn't be believable for him not to attain Mary Jane, even if she is Megan Fox or someone.

[TMC1982]

Not too happy about this reboot, considering that I actually liked Spiderman 3 (except for Venom and dancing-emo-Peter) and wanted to have the Raimi series continue. The fact that this happened because Sony keeps wanting to shove unfitting villians in doesn't help the matter, and with that kind of attitiude likely still prevalent, I doubt this movie is going to be that great. :shrug:



I thought Betty Brant was Peter's first love? Or are we just talking about major love interests, and not minor crushes? :confused:

While I don't necessarily oppose idea of doing a different Spidey film take (when compared to the Sam Raimi films), I agree with the feeling that the time frame that Sony is aiming for (five years after Spider-Man 3 came out) is a bit too soon to do a reboot. The Incredible Hulk with Edward Norton benefited in contrast, because the 2003 Ang Lee film didn't really have much working for itself to begin with. Batman Begins worked in the sense that the Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher films never provided a full blown origin story for Bruce Wayne. Plus, Batman & Robin was so reviled by fans due to its extreme campiness, that people were hungry to see a more down to earth, gritty Batman film.

[ToonFaithful]

Betty's brother died because of a fight between Doc Ock and Spidey not Gwen. I don't think they broke up because of it (although I'm not sure).
Sorry I didn't mean Gwen I meant Betty.

[underdog]

Logan Lerman says he's in talks with Sony for the lead role:



“It’s just, you know, conversations are starting. It’s a long process with the studio and the producers and everything. But it’s definitely a project that I’m really interested in, of course,” he told Billy. “I’d love to focus on the human element a little bit more. It’d be such a fun experience.”

http://www.accesshollywood.com/percy-jackson-and-the-olympians-star-logan-lerman-in-talks-for-spider-man-reboot_article_28641

[macattack]

Looking at him, he's an okay fit. Looks a bit kiddier than Tobey did in the original Spider-Man film, but there's obvious reasons for that.

[Old Guy]

Looks a bit kiddier than Tobey did in the original Spider-Man film, but there's obvious reasons for that.

Yeah, the movie takes place entirely in high school so casting an 18-year-old makes more sense than a 25-year-old like Tobey Maguire in the original.

[young101]

“It’s just, you know, conversations are starting. It’s a long process with the studio and the producers and everything. But it’s definitely a project that I’m really interested in, of course,” he told Billy. “I’d love to focus on the human element a little bit more. It’d be such a fun experience.”

These people toss out words like "human" or "the first three movies were just action flicks", but have they seen the spiderman movie series? Isn't that what's appealing about spider-man in general in the first place? They're just tossing these words out and although the raimi films were not perfect, they definitely humanized peter parker. They had to! That's what's so special, fundamental to the character. In fact, it's because the movies focused so much on that, that I felt the movie actually dragged at parts. It became a bit boring at times.

And I really hope they cast the right person. Just appearance wise, I personally wouldn't want a peter parker who looks perfect. Zac Efron and Percy Jackson, look like a little too perfect. I think they had the right idea when they hired tobey even though he looked a little sleepy eyed, but that's what also sort of added to his charm!

[Zorak Masaki]

Have they already chosen their J. Jonah Jameson? Hopefully they can keep JK Simmons as he's the definitive JJJ, and i cant think of anyone else who could effectively do that character (unless they want to make a more serious Jameson as opposed to the comic relief he was in the films).

[W.C.Reaf]

These people toss out words like "human" or "the first three movies were just action flicks", but have they seen the spiderman movie series? Isn't that what's appealing about spider-man in general in the first place? They're just tossing these words out and although the raimi films were not perfect, they definitely humanized peter parker. They had to! That's what's so special, fundamental to the character. In fact, it's because the movies focused so much on that, that I felt the movie actually dragged at parts. It became a bit boring at times.

Exactly. The only way he could be more "human" than the Raimi movies is to not have him the Spidey suit at all. Which they tried their best to do so in Spidey 3. ;)

[Old Guy]

Have they already chosen their J. Jonah Jameson?

No one has been officially cast. In fact, this Logan Lerman kid is the first official piece of casting news, in general, that has been released.

[RonDrakenfan17]

Who the heck is this kid? I've never heard of him before.

[Old Guy]

Who the heck is this kid? I've never heard of him before.

It's the kid whose playing Percy Jackson.

[CyclonatorZ]

Considering the relationship with Betty Brant didn't last too long people don't consider it more than a fling at best. Especially considering that Betty's twenty-something and Peter's a high schooler. They can't really pair those two together (though the Spectacular cartoon had some fun with the concept for an episode before they had Aunt May put the kibosh on it).

Gwen was the first serious, long-lived relationship, and the fact it ended in tragedy probably helps keep it in people's minds.


Ah, okay. Thanks for clearing that up. :)



As for unfitting villains, we'll soon see. Again, it largely matters how closely they adhere to the Ultimate mythos. Brian Bendis is attempting to become a consultant on the movie as this is HIS universe Hollywood wants to screw up, so I think faithfulness will depend on how much Bendis is involved, if at all.

The first villain was the Green Goblin, though it is a very DIFFERENT Goblin from the original continuity. It's a Goblin that has more in relation to the Hulk than the GG we all know. That might be enough to let them get away with using GG again. Other early villains include The Lizard, Doc Ock and Venom (Lizard and Ock are more familiar, Venom is again quite different), and Kingpin plays a massive role in the background and foreground throughout the story(whether Kingpin could be used, though, remains to be seen).


Yeah, and now that I think about it, that gives me even more reason to be skeptical of the reboot. I absolutely hated the Ultimate Green Goblin - for me he was nothing except a lame Hulk rip-off with the power of fire, and a total bastardization of everything that made the classic Goblin good. In fact, he was the reason I didn't bother reading more than the first issue of Ultimate Spiderman - up till Peter's battle with Hulk Goblin, I was okay with the series, but as soon as that giant Goblin monster showed up, I lost interest. If a spin-off series can't do even reasonable justice to one of the mythos's prime villians, then why should I have any hope that they'll do a better job with other big bads?

I dunno, perhaps I should have given the series a second chance, but I was so appalled with how they messed ol' Green Gobby up that I haven't to this date. And if the reboot is looking to go the Ultimate route with the villians as well as the good guys, then I'm not expecting anything that great. :shrug:


While I don't necessarily oppose idea of doing a different Spidey film take (when compared to the Sam Raimi films), I agree with the feeling that the time frame that Sony is aiming for (five years after Spider-Man 3 came out) is a bit too soon to do a reboot. The Incredible Hulk with Edward Norton benefited in contrast, because the 2003 Ang Lee film didn't really have much working for itself to begin with. Batman Begins worked in the sense that the Tim Burton/Joel Schumacher films never provided a full blown origin story for Bruce Wayne. Plus, Batman & Robin was so reviled by fans due to its extreme campiness, that people were hungry to see a more down to earth, gritty Batman film.

Exactly - and unless this reboot manages to at least somewhat better than the Raimi films, I doubt it will be able to suceed Batman Begins or the Hulk reboot did. Okay, so the latter wasn't a commercial smash, but considering that it was only made five years after the last Hulk movie, the box-office totals they got weren't bad at all. And Batman Begins succeeded in everything - profits, criticaly reception, and sequel quality. If the spiderman reboot wants to have this kind of sucess as well, the producers are seriously going to have to learn from Raimi's mistakes without making too many of their own. And IMO, making it "darker and edgier" is not the way to accomplish this.

[The Clown Prince]

Who the heck is this kid? I've never heard of him before.

The guy's been in a lot of stuff looking at his bio...

He was on the short lived Jack and Bobby show, he was in The Patriot, Riding in Cars with Boys, Hoot, The Butterfly Effect, and 3:10 to Yuma playing Christian Bale's oldest son.

I wouldn't be upset by this choice. In fact I do kinda like it if that's who Sony and Marc Webb decide to go with.

[Peter Paltridge]

It's the kid whose playing Percy Jackson.
Fine with me; I don't hate him yet.

[macattack]

Yeah, and now that I think about it, that gives me even more reason to be skeptical of the reboot. I absolutely hated the Ultimate Green Goblin - for me he was nothing except a lame Hulk rip-off with the power of fire, and a total bastardization of everything that made the classic Goblin good. In fact, he was the reason I didn't bother reading more than the first issue of Ultimate Spiderman - up till Peter's battle with Hulk Goblin, I was okay with the series, but as soon as that giant Goblin monster showed up, I lost interest. If a spin-off series can't do even reasonable justice to one of the mythos's prime villians, then why should I have any hope that they'll do a better job with other big bads?

I dunno, perhaps I should have given the series a second chance, but I was so appalled with how they messed ol' Green Gobby up that I haven't to this date. And if the reboot is looking to go the Ultimate route with the villians as well as the good guys, then I'm not expecting anything that great. :shrug:

You are missing out on a great comic, then. Bendis isn't the greatest writer in mainstream Marvel-far from it-but he's been absolutely golden in Ultimate Spider-Man. I have no complaints with the way the series has gone with Bendis at the helm, he adds layers to every character good and bad, he makes J.J.J. a sympathetic, funny, and cruel character all at once, he makes Aunt May an important, intelligent person, and his take on the Clone Saga completely destroys the original version.

He even made Ultimatum half-decent, by minimizing the gore and trying to evoke emotion and humanity from the carnage and death happening all around, and even kept some dark humor with Peter's interactions with the Hulk, all the while dealing with a bazillion awkward setups the main Ultimatum series kept throwing at the title competently.

Really, the only villain Bendis didn't have complete control of making WAS the Hulk-like Goblin, which was forced upon him by Bill Jemas (who has since left Marvel). But when Bendis got full control of the Green Goblin's destiny, he really made Norman Osborn a great character before killing Osborn off in the first issues after Mark Bagley left the title.

That being said I don't want the new film to be Dark Knight-bleak. That's not what Spider-Man is all about. Spider-Man is one of the closest things there is to an "everyman" superhero, he has ups and downs like everyone else, he has people he loves, he has people he hates, and he has responsibility. Making it too dark by focussing on the downs of Spider-Man's life is not only counterproductive but it is only getting a look at one half of the web-slinger. Spider-Man's life is a rose, it has flowers, it has thorns. You need both to get Spidey right.

I can accept Mary Jane being the main love interest again as long as they make her different from the original series but appealing in her own way. The trend is to pair Peter with Gwen which wouldn't be a bad choice either, though introducing Felicia or Debra into Peter's life early could be interesting too.

[Anarky]

need help from the webheads:

Can anyone identify the Immediate Tracks from the epic leaked trailer from SM3? I once them saved on my youtube channel box on fb and thoughtlessly deleted that application. d'oh!

here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCYfMpVY83s&feature=related

[Michael24]

Here's a list (http://www.soundtrack.net/trailers/?cid=S&mid=24339) of music that was used. Only one Immediate Music track, and it's listed for the teaser. But it might help. :)

[Pepperidge]

What if Wes Anderson directed the Spider-Man reboot? (http://keepspideyalive.com/profiles/blogs/what-if-wes-anderson-directed)

I'd watch it.

[TKnHappyNess]

This is what happens when they can't come up with something original, they have a reboot of something. Hopefully they won't have a confusing name like they've had a habit of doing with other movies.

[macattack]

What if Wes Anderson directed the Spider-Man reboot? (http://keepspideyalive.com/profiles/blogs/what-if-wes-anderson-directed)

I'd watch it.

They're like, standing around and being bored.

Most awesome movie ever. XD

I couldn't help but notice the vicious venom (no pun intended) being thrown at Sam Raimi, Kristen Dunst, and Tobey Maguire over the first 3 Spider-Man films. I'm just shaking my head. Where is this criticism coming from? I'll admit the third film isn't movie literature but the first two were enjoyable popcorn films, and the second film was by all standards impressively done.

Just because Raimi isn't hip enough to play "Vindicated" anywhere but in the end credits after a 40-second Elfman performance when people are already out of the theater doesn't mean he didn't know how to make a good movie. And he made some good movies.

Sure, Maguire and Kristen Dunst were no longer convincing as high school students. It didn't matter, because the movie quickly moved them onto college where they are more convincing. And Spider-Man 2 nailed the lifestyle of Peter Parker and his problems, and also gave Harry Osborn and Mary Jane their own problems that they had to cope with as well, along with a well-executed relationship with Otto Octavius.

Mistakes were made, but it doesn't stop the trilogy from being inheritedly bad.

So why are people treating all three films like a triple-shot of Batman & Robin?

I just don't understand.

I can understand Sony's decision to rush a movie into production ASAP because they don't want Marvel to get their hands on the movie rights (Marvel will never let the rights go), but it still feels too soon to me.

[dmxx116]

Well it was Raimi that left because he couldn't make the release date. SM4 was a mess and would have been a mess, we likely dodged a bullet witht hat movie. The reboot script is already written, even if it didn't happen now it was going to happen likely after Spiderman 4, Sony is smarter that we give them credit for, they knew Raimi wasn't a sure thing and that the actors were aging. Come on, by Spidey 6 Toby would be 40. No Sony don't know what they doing .Nobody continue to fail to see that Sony, Arad, and Zirskin were the ones that meddled with SM3 and SM4 and you think the reboot is going to be the best thing ever. Guess what! Sony, Arad, and Zirskin are still there. This movie will bomb 2012 and has no chance against The Avenger when it comes out in 2012.

[Wonderwall]

This movie will bomb 2012 and has no chance against The Avenger when it comes out in 2012.

Will it bomb? Who knows, Spider Man 3 for all the meddling and disappointing it was made a lot of cash. It won't be going against Avengers as that would be bad for both movies to be released super close to each other.

[creativerealms]

No Sony don't know what they doing .Nobody continue to fail to see that Sony, Arad, and Zirskin were the ones that meddled with SM3 and SM4 and you think the reboot is going to be the best thing ever. Guess what! Sony, Arad, and Zirskin are still there. This movie will bomb 2012 and has no chance against The Avenger when it comes out in 2012.

Just because it's comming out in the same year does not mean the two movies will conflict in any way. it's a LONG year.

[Old Guy]

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/


CULVER CITY, Calif., February 10, 2010 – Spider-Man will swing into theaters worldwide in 3D beginning July 3, 2012, it was announced today by Jeff Blake, Chairman of Sony Pictures Worldwide Marketing & Distribution. The new film which is still untitled, will begin production later this year directed by Marc Webb from a screenplay by James Vanderbilt. Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin will produce the film from Columbia Pictures and Marvel Studios.

Commenting on the announcement, Blake said, “Spider-Man is the ultimate summer movie-going experience, and we’re thrilled the filmmakers are presenting the next installment in 3D. Spider-Man is one of the most popular characters in the world, and we know audiences are eager and excited to discover Marc’s fantastic vision for Peter Parker and the franchise.”

I thought it was being released in May. :confused: Well...4th of July weekend is great as well. Spider-Man 2 did well on that holiday.

[ToonFaithful]

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/



I thought it was being released in May. :confused: Well...4th of July weekend is great as well. Spider-Man 2 did well on that holiday.
No wonder I remember seeing SM-2 during the summer. I was confused because I kept thinking I saw it during May.

[Old Guy]

No wonder I remember seeing SM-2 during the summer. I was confused because I kept think I saw that during May.

Yeah, it was released on Wednesday, June 30, 2004. Two days before the 4th of July weekend.

[dmxx116]

Most of the internet complainting because Spider-man has been establish already in our mind and don't want to see an teenager playing SM.. Tobey did that, done that. what we want is a CONTINUATION!!!!!! not a reboot of the same stuff we like to see Spider-Man fight Rhino, Vulture,Mysterio etc.. not how peter Parker interact with high school students
and saying yes to Aunt May or ok sir to Uncle Ben or flop around with a teen Mary Jane
An inexperienced director who's never directed an action movie, and now its going to be in 3d to boot? This is like getting an indie cartoonist who's only worked in black and white to design and draw a full color pop up Spider-Man book. In all likelihood this is doomed to fail.

Who cares... not me. Reboot was a horrible idea. You had a great cast and director... good job throwing that away.

[Wonderwall]

Most of the internet complainting because Spider-man has been establish already in our mind and don't want to see a freaking teenager playing SM.. Tobey did that, done that. what we want is a CONTINUATION!!!!!! not a reboot of the same stuff we like to see Spider-Man fight Rhino, Vulture,Mysterio etc.. not how peter Parker interact with high school students
and saying yes to Aunt May or ok sir to Uncle Ben or flop around with a teen Mary Jane
An inexperienced director who's never directed an action movie, and now its going to be in 3d to boot? This is like getting an indie cartoonist who's only worked in black and white to design and draw a full color pop up Spider-Man book. In all likelihood this is doomed to fail.

Who cares... not me. Reboot was a horrible idea. You had a great cast and director... good job throwing that away.

Cool...enjoy yourself. Honestly if you can't add anything constructive don't post just to moan and complain.

[ToonFaithful]

Most of the internet complainting because Spider-man has been establish already in our mind and don't want to see a freaking teenager playing SM.. Tobey did that, done that. what we want is a CONTINUATION!!!!!! not a reboot of the same stuff we like to see Spider-Man fight Rhino, Vulture,Mysterio etc.. not how peter Parker interact with high school students
and saying yes to Aunt May or ok sir to Uncle Ben or flop around with a teen Mary Jane
An inexperienced director who's never directed an action movie, and now its going to be in 3d to boot? This is like getting an indie cartoonist who's only worked in black and white to design and draw a full color pop up Spider-Man book. In all likelihood this is doomed to fail.

Who cares... not me. Reboot was a horrible idea. You had a great cast and director... good job throwing that away.
How do you know it's gonna fail? It's not even out yet.

[macattack]

We're two years away from the reboot. There's no indication of how good or bad it's gonna be a yet. We're just speculating on what could happen.

[dmxx116]

Cool...enjoy yourself. Honestly if you can't add anything constructive don't post just to moan and complain. I'm not here trying to complain but I think most fans of the first three movies don't want an reboot they just want Spider-Man 4 while other movies franchise like Mission Impossible and Pirates of the Caribbean are getting sequels but not Spider-Man.

[Master Toon]

Is it ok if we discuss what we'd like to see in the Reboot? Because here are a few things:

A younger Peter Parker - At first I was kind of against the idea of a "teen" Spider-Man but now that I think about it, it's not totally inaccurate and it'll be a clear differentiation from the first wave of Spidey movies.

Marvel Team-up - If you didn't already know, I'm a fan of crossovers. I'd like to see The Human Torch or Iceman or Iroman in the reboot. Not as a character who last through the whole flick but makes a cameo.

A villain defeated at the beginning - Instead of trying to squeeze in lesser-known villains they should just have Spidey narrating at the very beginning and then he gets clobbered by a villain. A small scuffle takes place and then the guy goes to jail. This is just to show that the city is in constant danger instead of random villainy.

[KCJ506]

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/



I thought it was being released in May. :confused: Well...4th of July weekend is great as well. Spider-Man 2 did well on that holiday.

The Avengers is set to come out in May 2012.

[Old Guy]

Marvel Team-up

Not gonna happen since different studios have rights to different characters.


The Avengers is set to come out in May 2012.

Sorry. Had a blonde moment.

[dmxx116]

http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/



I thought it was being released in May. :confused: Well...4th of July weekend is great as well. Spider-Man 2 did well on that holiday. They going to open Spider-Man reboot an few days after Star Trek 2 witch open on June 29. I'm say The Spider-Man reboot moved from that date.

[Old Guy]

They going to open Spider-Man reboot a few days after Star Trek 2

A week. No different than opening Spider-Man 3, Pirates of the Caribbean 3, and Shrek the Third in the same month.

EDIT:

To specify: JJ Abram's Star Trek sequel opens on Friday, June 29th. So, it'll have an entire weekend to itself. The Spider-Man reboot opens on Tuesday, July 3. So, yes, they are close to each other, however, with the 4th of July being in the middle of the week, Spidey's real time to dominate will be July 6-8. So, in a way, they're a week apart. In a way.

[Master Toon]

Not gonna happen since different studios have rights to different characters.

I forgot about that. :mad:

I guess the closest I'll get to a crossover is that Avengers movie. :(

[suss2it]

I forgot about that. :mad:

I guess the closest I'll get to a crossover is that Avengers movie. :(

That's actually a pretty big crossover.

[Master Toon]

I meant to put "that I like" in parentheses. :D

[kdmccaskill]

It's Almost Official Spiderman Reboot Is Ultimate Spiderman The Movie

Latinoreview reader Mark M. tipped the site off to a couple of tweets by Ultimate Spider-Man creator and writer Brian Bendis talking about his meeting with Sony on the new Spidey flick:

On January 11th he tweeted this:

i work as a consultant on the marvel movies. this is a sony movie. i have no involvement. but maybe if you all scream loud enough :)

But today he just posted this on Twitter:

Just spent a very interesting morning at Sony with the entire spidey movie team!! Very very cool stuff!!

This is good news actually for the Spider-Man reboot if they're going in the Ultimate Spider-Man direction. The reboot is a high school Peter Parker and Ultimate Spider-Man started out with a 15 year old Petey.

I'm sure he's in meetings as an advisor of sorts though. What do you guys think? Is Sony going in the Ultimate direction with this reboot?

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/will-the-spider-man-reboot-be-of-the-ultimate-kind-9246

[Manga4life]

I still can't believe they are rebooting the Spider-Man franchise already, its way too early in my opinion and the movies have been fine as they are, why the heck would they want to tell the same story over and over, they do this crap enough in the comics and I guess they figured that instead of being creative they could just keep selling the same story but with slight variations. I hate this way of creative thinking and I really don't see myself going to the movies to see this, its just going to be my way of not showing my support to this project.

[sdp]

Well Ultimate Spiderman is considered great or at least it was considered great, I think I've read its taken a downturn in quality. I do know people hate the Ultimate universe in general though. I'm not familiar with Ultimate Spiderman but the little I've seen I haven't liked since it messes with so many things from "classic" spiderman, but then again it is supposed to be good.

[underdog]

I still can't believe they are rebooting the Spider-Man franchise already, its way too early in my opinion and the movies have been fine as they are, why the heck would they want to tell the same story over and over, they do this crap enough in the comics and I guess they figured that instead of being creative they could just keep selling the same story but with slight variations. I hate this way of creative thinking and I really don't see myself going to the movies to see this, its just going to be my way of not showing my support to this project.

Well the idea is that if they wait, Sony will loose the rights as it would revert back to Marvel (Disney). So this is just a matter of a forced rush and not loose the rights to a moneymaking franchise to a competitor.

[Manga4life]

Well the idea is that if they wait, Sony will loose the rights as it would revert back to Marvel (Disney). So this is just a matter of a forced rush and not loose the rights to a moneymaking franchise to a competitor.

Then it becomes a case of corperate greed sticking it's nose into something to gross money off of it (happens all the time) and now they are going to ruin the Spider-Man movie franchise in an attempt to bank whatever they can before they lose the rights. BLAH! I still won't be supporting this film out of pure principal, my guess is that they are going to rush this project too which won't help it any.

[kdmccaskill]

It's pretty clear that Ultimate Spiderman is gonna be the blue print for the reboot. Some people are confused about the comic, or have never heard of it,
well this video is for those people



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmK6YZ0K6LU

[macattack]

I still enjoy Ultimate Spider-Man to this day, Bendis has been sloppy in the mainstream universe but his writing for USM is quite excellent, once he broke with Bill Jemas' ideas after the first six issues. His writing for Peter and MJ is great, and he really freshened everything up for new and younger readers. Bendis stayed true to the original spirit of the comics but transformed things in a lot of ways.

I don't understand why some people dislike it. It's an entirely different universe that plays by its own set of rules. Why do people want the Ultimate universe to act like the original universe? That would defeat the purpose of making a new universe. You have to do something different if you're going to do a reboot.

There'll likely be differences in the movie version if it is based on the Ultimate continuity, just like Raimi's version changed the original continuity. The original trilogy will be on their minds and they could change things significantly from the Ultimate line as a result. One quick 'n' easy change would be to flip Gwen and MJ's roles, and they might not do Hulk-Goblin.

[W.C.Reaf]

and they might not do Hulk-Goblin.

Even if they were making a straight Ultimate Spider-Man adaption I'd doubt they'd put the money into making a Hulk like villain. If the Goblin is in the reboot series I'd think he'd be a guy in a costume, or possibly a hybrid of the two, so he'd be human size with green skin.

Same reason we won't see a proper rhino in the movies, the technology isn't there within what they're willing to pay for it.

[KCJ506]

I'm curious of what people think about this. If fight scenes get more intense should Spidey wisecrack?

Most of the complaints people had about Raimi's Spider-man is the lack of quips. I partly agree, but it's just that some fight scenes were too serious for him to be joking around. Where could you have fitted quips during the train fight without breaking the pace? That would have ruined it.

The way some people talk about quips and more quips make it seem like they want it EXACTLY like in the cartoons or comics which is quipping nonstop and would be a bit too much in a movie. He should do it only in a certain situations. Like his first couple times fighting the villain he should joke around and whenever he's fighting regular goons. But during the final battle or when he's trying to save his girlfriend he should be serious.

[macattack]

Even if they were making a straight Ultimate Spider-Man adaption I'd doubt they'd put the money into making a Hulk like villain. If the Goblin is in the reboot series I'd think he'd be a guy in a costume, or possibly a hybrid of the two, so he'd be human size with green skin.

Same reason we won't see a proper rhino in the movies, the technology isn't there within what they're willing to pay for it.

And that's precisely the point. I get the sense here that Sony wants minimum budget for maximum profit. They're going to give Webb 90-100 million, which might seem like a lot but pales in comparison to Raimi's films (Spidey 3 ballooned into the 250-million range). It would take 100 million just to do Hulk-Goblin, which makes me think that if they do Goblin he isn't going to be Hulk-big.

That being said, again, I expect further changes from the Ultimate continuity to distinguish itself more from the Raimi movies. Going to KCJ506's post, I do think more wisecracks could be one of them. Ultimate Spidey is a wisecracking machine, even more so than in Spectacular Spider-Man. There's no way there's not going to be some snarky "'Yaaaaargh?' You need a better catchphrase than that!" type jokes being thrown around, only less lame than the one I made up on the spot. XD At the same time, though, I do think we should expect things to be more serious in spots too, when serious drama is needed, and some of the edge might be lifted off of the humor if they go with the "Spidey's wisecracking because he's scared out of his mind" thing.

And I also think this Spidey reboot will follow the current trend of pairing Gwen with Peter because apparently all roads with Gwen don't have to lead to death. That's what my gut instinct tells me, that MJ is not going to be playing the most significant role this time around, at least not immediately.

As for other low-budget villains, I wouldn't put it past them to have Spidey paste Shocker once or twice. Ultimate Shocker is not exactly a high budget villain and something useful for Spidey's wisecrack quotient. Granted, if they make more Spidey films after this one we'll eventually see the "wham issue" when Shocker gets his revenge but for this movie Shocker could make the lame villain to warm up to the main one.

[Rick Jones]

And I also think this Spidey reboot will follow the current trend of pairing Gwen with Peter because apparently all roads with Gwen don't have to lead to death. That's what my gut instinct tells me, that MJ is not going to be playing the most significant role this time around, at least not immediately.
I'd just hope that it doesn't lead them to resurrect her in 616 continuity.

Personally, the worst parts of the last two movies were the scenes dealing with Peter's home life, MJ and Harry and I'd hope that things go better this time around. While movie Spidey wasn't ridiculously quip happy, he did have some and he didn't come across as mute, unlike the 70s live-action Spidey. I didn't think that any perceived lack of wisecracks was a problem at all. I'm sure if he had more, we'd probably have complaints now that Spidey couldn't shut up and was more corny than funny.

One thing that I always thought would be cool is if we'd see lower level villains cameo during scenes that would normally feature average hoods, thugs and robbers, as fun treats for us longtime fans. So instead of three faceless guys in an alley, why not The Enforcers ? Or instead of masked bank robbers, why not Shocker or Beetle ?

One of my biggest wishes, other than a better MJ, would be a great Flash Thompson. That was such a wasted opportunity in the first movie.

[kdmccaskill]

Ultimate Peter Parker is very different from movie peter and from Amazing Peter. Ultimate Peter is a very paranoid teen to the point where he would be considered clinically insane. His relationship with Mary Jane is different also,
Peter is very demeaning towards her, and he treats her like his 8 year old daughter. One example would be is when Peter is outside eating lunch by him self, MJ comes over and Peter says "You can't be around me". MJ asks "Why?
and Peter yells at her "Because you don't listen"



Logan is perfect to play Ultimate Peter Parker, I sensed that he has this dual personality quality to him similar to Christian Bale. Logan seems very reserved but very Cocky at the same time.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UXWGtj5mTw

[macattack]

Peter doesn't want MJ to be hurt in the Ultimate continuity and he doesn't quite know how to express himself like most 15-year-old boys. He clearly cares for her but he desperately doesn't want her to be hurt and breaks up with her one time to be with Shadowcat (which, oddly for a crack pairing, worked) because Kitty Pryde can protect herself, before realizing how much damage he's done and going back to MJ.

He makes immature mistakes like every fifteen year old boy on the planet and goes through a lot of emotional turmoil that would drive most fifteen-year-olds crazy. The fact Peter hasn't completely lost it is a miracle.

MJ also has her bouts of immaturity as well, it's not just Peter. They act just like teenagers do. We can't expect them to make the most mature or logical decision.

[kdmccaskill]

Logan Lerman Update

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yj_7VZiYITM

[kid rabbit]

what gets me is when the remake comes out people are going to miss
the original movies

Ramie was good at two thing great action scenes and great actors
with all the internet complaints the spider man movies did a surprising emotional story charters even the sandman who lets face 2-dimensional charter in the comics

will the new one have any of that charter development

[kdmccaskill]

Sony has said this is gonna be based on Ultimate


The touchstone for the new movie will not be the 1960s comics, which were the inspiration behind the movies by Raimi, who grew on up on them, but rather this past decade’s “Ultimate Spider-Man” comics by Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Bagley where the villain-fighting took a back seat to the high school angst.

http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=9001

[underdog]

what gets me is when the remake comes out people are going to miss
the original movies

Ramie was good at two thing great action scenes and great actors
with all the internet complaints the spider man movies did a surprising emotional story charters even the sandman who lets face 2-dimensional charter in the comics

will the new one have any of that charter development

Well, seeing that Marc Webb of (500) Days of Summer is directing it and there has been talk about the film using elements Ultimate Spiderman, I'd believe that those two factors would raise the probability of proper character development (possibly outdoing Raimi's version).

[RonDrakenfan17]

Well I hope there will be a bit of fighting villains in this film. Wonder when they'll give out official information on the casting roles?

[KCJ506]

I'm not expecting much improvement especially now that I'm hearing that the villains are gonna take a backseat to drama.

Opinion of Raimi's Spider-Man seems to have been by skewed by Spider-Man 3, but I remember what the reaction was when the second one hit cinemas. The biggest criticism on message boards was that it focused too much on Peter and MJ and not enough on Spider-man. (and personally I think it could made more use of Doctor Octopus). Because despite what people seem to think Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy weren't 'villain-centric', he actually called for a villain to be dropped from each of the first 2 films (Doc Ock in the first, the Lizard in the second) so he could focus more on Peter's story and his relationship with MJ.

If the villains take any more of a back seat than they did in Spider-Man 1 or 2 then I can't see it being very well received by the wider audiences, there will be calls for less romance and more violence.

[underdog]

Define what you mean by drama, do you mean mating and love making? I'd assume that they (Sony and Marc Webb) would be smarter and not make this (500) Days of Peter Parker, if Superman Returns taught us anything it is that a superhero film should not flirt too much around a romance. There should be a balance between the human side and action side. Not sure what you are talking about how the villains are taking the backseat, don't you need villains a superhero film?

The first two Spider-Man movies were able to deliver more balance; you were able to see and feel what Peter Parker went through. Personally, I felt SP3 crammed too much villains and too much stories as the film felt rather rushed and forced. I kind of liked the interaction between Peter and MJ in the first two, but it seemed like things went sloppy and inconsistent in the third.

[KCJ506]

Drama as Peter's love life, high school problems etc. By taking a backseat I meant less time on villains, not much action and focusing more on drama

This is coming from an article that said It's that said villain battles take a back seat to teen drama in the Ultimate Spider-man comics. Since the movie is going to be based off of that, people are getting the feeling that the movie will be scaled down. It's also coming from the rumors of an $80 million budget.

[underdog]

Oh okay, I'll just take a wait and see approach. I think we'll see action scenes, the fact that Webb has met with James Cameron to discuss 3-D techniques makes me think we'll see much more web-slinging action, a visual thrill ride perhaps.

[macattack]

Oh okay, I'll just take a wait and see approach. I think we'll see action scenes, the fact that Webb has met with James Cameron to discuss 3-D techniques makes me think we'll see much more web-slinging action, a visual thrill ride perhaps.

With $80 million to work with I wouldn't expect that many action scenes, but the ones that will be there will look pretty good.

One thing to remember is that while Ultimate Spider-Man does place a heavier priority on Peter's home life that isn't to say the series is devoid of action. Far from it. There are some epic set pieces all over the series. And a LOT of quippage. Seriously, Peter snarks a LOT.

[kdmccaskill]

If Raimi would have done Ultimate Vulture it might have worked


http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l141/kmccaskill2/Untitled-Scanned-23-24.jpg
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l141/kmccaskill2/Untitled-Scanned-03-04.jpg

[kdmccaskill]

Bendis Breaks His Silence On Spider-Man Reboot!


Brian Micheal Bendis, the creator and writer of Ultimate Spiderman said this to IGN


IGN Comics: I wanted to ask you a completely unrelated question. You tweeted a week or two ago that you went to Sony because of the Spider-Man films. I remember a while back we had discussed how you had been pulled in to watch the first Spider-Man film with Stan Lee. I know you can't say much here but is your involvement with this relaunch more significant than screening bits of the movie?

Bendis: I honestly don't know what I'm allowed to say. So I'm going to pass for now. It was quite the morning and afternoon – quite the long meeting – and quite amazing. I'll let you know when I can say what it was. But I left the day happy. And that's kind of what people want to hear from me anyhow. Was it good news or bad news? It was good news. Everything I've heard since that meeting sounded like good news – in theory.

IGN Comics: Awesome. Well when you do find out what you can say and when, please shoot me an e-mail or give me a ring.

Bendis: Absolutely. I'm not trying to be tight-lipped or coy, but I don't know what's appropriate to the other creative people involved. It's their story to tell and I don't want to be running around saying, "Well I saw it! I saw it first!" Two seconds ago we were talking about ********s who spoil the endings of books – I don't want to spoil things about a movie that hasn't even been shot yet. –laughs-

IGN Comics: I hear you. More generally, not speaking to your involvement, it's my understanding this is going back to Pete in high school, back to a more youthful age. What would you consider key guidelines to that sort of approach?

Bendis: I think you should do a line-for-line, exact adaptation of my work. -laughs- No, no, honestly I always say, you know, if you look at Ultimate Spider-Man, that's what I think. Why would I create something other than what I thought should be out there. And being asked to Sony was immensely flattering. It did make me feel that, every year since I've broken into comic books, a little more of the wall between mainstream Hollywood and comics is being broken down. I appreciate that. Because there was a huge wall up, and now there's not even a question that they call someone who might know something. And it's not just me, it's my other peers. And every time I hear that, I always think that's good thinking. You know what I mean? I'm not meaning to sound arrogant, like, "Yes! Of course you should call me!" but for this Spider-Man or for Geoff's stuff, it just seems like it's smart. So I'm thrilled to be a part of that aspect of it.


http://comics.ign.com/articles/107/1073387p3.html

[Generator James]

2 pretty big updates.
Many news sites such as SuperHeroHype are "confirming" that Logan Lerman(Percy Jackson) has been cast as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. But Sony's been denying this so take this with a cup of tea.
Meaghan Jette Martin has been rumoured to play Gwen Stacy. Who's MJM, you ask? She camoed in House, she played Kat's sister on ABC Family's "10 Things I Hate About You" & she played as a "villian" in "Camp Rock". Should this be confirmed, (or even if Gwen plays a major role in the reboot) the chances of this simply being a live action adaptation of Spectacular Spider-Man would increase...a lot.
My Thoughts
Logan could (possibly) pull off Peter. He was a pretty good actor in Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief. He just had to work with a god-awful script.:(
Since I watched 10TIHAU religiously I've seen her acting chops. She pulled off Kat's sister perfectly, but Gwen Stacy?Probably.
Either way I'd watch the reboot with these two, but could pull off the whole reboot thing like SS-P? Just leave out the Introductions, but go into Spidey's 1st adventure?

[Old Guy]

she had a minor role in "Camp Rock".

It wasn't a minor role. She was the "villain" in the movie.

[TMC1982]

2 pretty big updates.

Many news sites such as SuperHeroHype are "confirming" that Logan Lerman(Percy Jackson) has been cast as Peter Parker/Spider-Man. But Sony's been denying this so take this with a cup of tea.
Meaghan Jette Martin has been rumoured to play Gwen Stacy. Who's MJM, you ask? She camoed in House, she played Kat's sister on ABC Family's "10 Things I Hate About You" & she had a minor role in "Camp Rock". Should this be confirmed, (or even if Gwen plays a major role in the reboot) the chances of this simply being a live action adaptation of Spectacular Spider-Man would increase...a lot.

My Thoughts

Logan could (possibly) pull off Peter. He was a pretty good actor in Percy Jackson & The Olympians: The Lightning Thief. He just had to work with a god-awful script.:(
Since I watched 10TIHAU religiously I've seen her acting chops. She pulled off Kat's sister perfectly, but Gwen Stacy?Probably.

Either way I'd watch the reboot with these two, but could pull off the whole reboot thing like SS-P? Just leave out the Introductions, but go into Spidey's 1st adventure?

If Gwen Stacy is going to be the female lead/main love interest instead of Mary Jane (as was the case in the Sam Raimi films) something tells me that the filmmakers are in part, going for more of a Spectacular Spider-Man (although, I am aware that the Ultimate comics are supposedly, going to be the principal inspiration) approach (as been previously mentioned). I'm guessing that it's safe to say that the "no Gwen Stacy" embargo (since he has been long dead in the comics) has been lifted (since Spider-Man 3 and later, The Spectacular Spider-Man used her).

[Old Guy]

If Gwen Stacy is going to be the female lead/main love interest instead of Mary Jane (as was the case in the Sam Raimi films) something tells me that the filmmakers are in part, going for more of a Spectacular Spider-Man (although, I am aware that the Ultimate comics are supposedly, going to be the principal inspiration) approach (as been previously mentioned). I'm guessing that it's safe to say that the "no Gwen Stacy" embargo (since he has been long dead in the comics) has been lifted (since Spider-Man 3 and later, The Spectacular Spider-Man used her).

Gwen was a love interest before MJ in the main comics as well.

[W.C.Reaf]

Should this be confirmed, (or even if Gwen plays a major role in the reboot) the chances of this simply being a live action adaptation of Spectacular Spider-Man would increase...a lot.

That really depends on how they use her. If they use her SSM version she'll be Peter's geeky love interest and best friend, if they use her original comics version she'll be overall mean to Peter at first while harbouring feeling for him, if they use her later comics version she'll be whiny and crying a lot, if they use her Ultimate version she'll dress like a punk and threaten to stab someone who's bulling Peter.

Just because it has Gwen in it doesn't mean it'll be more like SSM. Since they say they're basing it more on the Ultimate comics they might use that Gwen and she won't be a love interest but a big sister type to Peter.

[Generator James]

That really depends on how they use her. If they use her SSM version she'll be Peter's geeky love interest and best friend, if they use her original comics version she'll be overall mean to Peter at first while harbouring feeling for him, if they use her later comics version she'll be whiny and crying a lot, if they use her Ultimate version she'll dress like a punk and threaten to stab someone who's bulling Peter.

Just because it has Gwen in it doesn't mean it'll be more like SSM. Since they say they're basing it more on the Ultimate comics they might use that Gwen and she won't be a love interest but a big sister type to Peter.
In that case I vote for SS-M Gwen. I'm sorry but Main Comics & Ultimate Gwen just:ack:

[RonDrakenfan17]

What to trust, what to trust?
Didn't many websites think Zac Efron was Spider-Man too?
I wish we'd get confirmation already :shrug:

[kdmccaskill]

Bendis Confirms To Fan That SM Reboot Will Be An Adaptation Of Ultimate Spider-Man Volume 1 (http://boards.sonypictures.com/spiderman/showthread.php?t=21581)



itsleroy is a member of the Official Bendis message board, and has got Bendis to respond on that board to his SM reboot questions in the past.
That same member posted this on Superherohype:


I talked to Bendis today.

Yeah, I met him at Emerald City ComiCon in Seattle, it was awesome. Got a picture, and a signature. Awesome guy, I ate some of his cookies. Was thirty minutes late though.. I asked him really quickly about the reboot, I told him to "give a lot of good ideas to the movie, just please make sure its really good". (Sorry to all the Ultimate-SM haters).

He told me, "From what I've heard it's going to be exactly like this (pointing to my Volume 1 of Ultimate Spider-Man". ("Verbatim")

.. So. Yay!


http://forums.superherohype.com/show...=333518&page=9 (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=333518&page=9)
http://boards.sonypictures.com/spiderman/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif

[KCJ506]

If I recall properly GG and Electro were the first two major opponents in USM. I think Otto Octavis also appears.

If GG and Doc Ock appear so soon it's basically the plot of the first and second movie again. Great....

[young101]

I thought they were trying to keep this quiet. Marc Webb seemed not to even let anything slip through his mouth.

[W.C.Reaf]

If I recall properly GG and Electro were the first two major opponents in USM. I think Otto Octavis also appears.

Arc 1 is Green Goblin, Arc 2 is Electro, the Enforcers, and the Kingpin, Arc 3 is Doc Ock.

I really hope that they don't just adapt USM vol 1 to the screen because I'd like to see what these new guys can come up with and how they're different from Raimi's Spidey. The comics were really good and have some of my favourite Spidey stories in them, but it's not something I'd like to see completely adapted (if that makes sense).

[Old Guy]

Arc 2 is Electro

And that's our villain, I assume, which is amusing since that's who James Cameron chose when he was attached to the project back in the `90s.

[Spideyzilla]

And that's our villain, I assume, which is amusing since that's who James Cameron chose when he was attached to the project back in the `90s.

And Sandman.

[Rick Jones]

There are so many villains that I would have liked to eventually see in live-action. I'm really not too eager to see another version of Green Goblin just yet. I also hope that this thing will be a hybrid of Ultimate and Amazing in some ways.

[KCJ506]

If Electro is in then there's gotta be another villain. I can't see him holding his own movie. He's powerful, but not really the brightest bulb.

He has one power and weakness. How's the movie going to play out? They fight, Spidey beats him with water, the end. I mean, the guy is made out of electricity, do they really expect the audience to be on the edge of their seat guessing how Spider-Man is going to take him down? Anyone with an elementary school education is going to see it coming a mile away.

And one more thing, I'm neither for nor against Venom being in the reboot, but absolutely no Carnage whatsoever. Gotta be the most overrated villain ever.

[kdmccaskill]

Latino Review Confirms the Ultimate Spiderman Adaptation story

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/next-spider-man-will-be-ultimate-9452

[Old Guy]

If Electro is in then there's gotta be another villain.

The Enforcers, I assume.

[Spideyzilla]

If this is based on USM Vol. 1, then wouldn't Green Goblin be the villain?

[macattack]

He would, but it would be a vastly different Goblin than in the first movie. More like the Hulk than traditional GG.

[Spideyzilla]

He would, but it would be a vastly different Goblin than in the first movie. More like the Hulk than traditional GG.

I know, I'm not looking forward to it.

[KCJ506]

If GG were to in the first movie then it would just make it seem like a remake instead of a true reboot considering that they'll be on familiar ground(i.e. re-telling his origin, re-introducing his supporting cast, starting him back in high school again)

If you were remaking a movie from 20 or 30 years ago, using the same villain would be fine (e.g., it was fine to reuse the Joker in the Dark Knight, because it was a sequel and the last time the Joker had appeared in a film was 1989). But when you're rebooting a movie that just came out eight years ago (the first Spidey film was released in 2002), that's too soon.

[Old Guy]

If this is based on USM Vol. 1, then wouldn't Green Goblin be the villain?


If GG were to in the first movie then it would just make it seem like a remake instead of a true reboot considering that they'll be on familiar ground(i.e. re-telling his origin, re-introducing his supporting cast, starting him back in high school again)

If you were remaking a movie from 20 or 30 years ago, using the same villain would be fine (e.g., it was fine to reuse the Joker in the Dark Knight, because it was a sequel and the last time the Joker had appeared in a film was 1989). But when you're rebooting a movie that just came out eight years ago (the first Spidey film was released in 2002), that's too soon.

Exactly. I wouldn't mind Norman Osborne being included, but Green Goblin would be a BIG mistake. So, my guess is Electro with some other villain. Maybe Shocker or Scorpion. Basically a villain that Osborne could create.

[kdmccaskill]

Bendis is calling the kid a liar on twitter

Sorry Bendis Twitter Won't Save You!:surrend:


The kid has pics:eek:


http://photos-c.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs495.ash1/27018_1358312728544_1553290768_904549_4715272_n.jpg
http://hphotos-snc3.fbcdn.net/hs495.snc3/27018_1358313848572_1553290768_904569_5577694_n.jpg
http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash1/hs495.ash1/27018_1358310928499_1553290768_904522_711183_n.jpg
http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs495.snc3/27018_1358311088503_1553290768_904524_408078_n.jpg
http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs495.snc3/27018_1358311248507_1553290768_904525_1440248_n.jpg

Who do I believe, you or my lying eyes?


Bendis you should really be ashamed of yourself, making this kid look like an A-hole to try to save you Sony job

My guess is come Friday morning Bendis should be getting a call from Sony informing him that he's joining the 9.7 percent of Americans unemployed:scared:

[mr.happy]

Bendis you should really be ashamed of yourself, making this kid look like an A-hole...Surely Bendis didn't force him to wear that hat.


My guess is come Friday morning Bendis should be getting a call from Sony informing him that he's joining the 9.7 percent of Americans unemployed:scared:Errr, what? Are these pictures meant to somehow prove that Bendis confirmed something about the Spidey reboot?:confused:

[Discloner]

Errr, what? Are these pictures meant to somehow prove that Bendis confirmed something about the Spidey reboot?:confused:Or that he is employed by Sony?

[Rick Jones]

Errr, what? Are these pictures meant to somehow prove that Bendis confirmed something about the Spidey reboot?:confused:Seriously, all I see are ticket stubs, TPBs, and passes. Am I missing something ?

[W.C.Reaf]

Seriously, all I see are ticket stubs, TPBs, and passes. Am I missing something ?

Same here. All these pics prove is that the kid met Bendis at a convention not that Bendis said anything about the reboot.

Then again given the post I think kdmccaskill might have been a little sarcastic.;)

[Rick Jones]

Probably so. Sometimes it gets a little tough to recognize internet sarcasm.

[kdmccaskill]

Bendis Has A Credibility Issue


1) January 16 Bendis tweets this i work as a consultant on the marvel movies. this is a sony movie. i have no involvement. but maybe if you all scream loud enough;)


2) February 18th Bendis Tweets Just spent a very interesting morning at Sony with the entire spidey movie team!! Very very cool stuff!!

3) February 19th Bendis responded by saying he is no way involved with the reboot


4) February 27th Bendis does an Ign interview and tells them he was humbled to honored to be asked by Sony to be involved, and he told Ign that he told Sony if they want to know what he thinks Ultimate spiderman is what he thinks.


5) March 15 A Seattle student post on a message board that he had a conversation with Bendis, in which he asked Bendis what is the reboot gonna be about. He says Bendis pointed to his autographed Ultimate Spiderman volume 1 , and smiled.

6) March 15th Bendis Denies this saying "That never happened". Bendis doesn't say he never met the kid, but implies he never met the kid.

7) March 16th Pictures appear online of the boy with Bendis at the convention and Bendis attacks Latino Review


So i ask you Bendis Defend yourself. What exactly did you say to this boy?

[W.C.Reaf]

So let's have a look at this timeline:


1) January 16 Bendis tweets this i work as a consultant on the marvel movies. this is a sony movie. i have no involvement. but maybe if you all scream loud enough;)

Bendis is interested in working on the reboot but no one at Sony has offered him a job yet.


2) February 18th Bendis Tweets Just spent a very interesting morning at Sony with the entire spidey movie team!! Very very cool stuff!!

Sony invited him over to talk about the reboot with the people working on the movie...


) February 19th Bendis responded by saying he is no way involved with the reboot

...but he still hasn't been officially hired by Sony to work on it yet.


4) February 27th Bendis does an Ign interview and tells them he was humbled to honored to be asked by Sony to be involved, and he told Ign that he told Sony if they want to know what he thinks Ultimate spiderman is what he thinks.

Sony has asked him to be more involved in the reboot.


5) March 15 A Seattle student post on a message board that he had a conversation with Bendis, in which he asked Bendis what is the reboot gonna be about. He says Bendis pointed to his autographed Ultimate Spiderman volume 1 , and smiled.

Kid talks big on a message board, offers no proof to back up what he's saying.


6) March 15th Bendis Denies this saying "That never happened". Bendis doesn't say he never met the kid, but implies he never met the kid.

Bendis squashes rumour.


7) March 16th Pictures appear online of the boy with Bendis at the convention and Bendis attacks Latino Review

Kid posts what he considers "proof" but since none of it backs up what he's claiming to have happened it's all meaningless.

So in conclusion: we can use Twitter to chart someone’s career, people on message boards need to back up their claims with proof or else they're just spreading lies for fun, you can't back up actions with pictures that don't contain said actions. ;)


So i ask you Bendis Defend yourself. What exactly did you say to this boy?

Apparently nothing, it's what he allegedly didn't say that is supposedly getting him in trouble.


5) March 15 A Seattle student post on a message board that he had a conversation with Bendis, in which he asked Bendis what is the reboot gonna be about. He says Bendis pointed to his autographed Ultimate Spiderman volume 1 , and smiled.

:p

[dmxx116]

Sony should have been filming Spider-Man 4 right now and not talking about doing a reboot. As for Bendis I'm no fan of his and why would Sony hired him in first place.

[suss2it]

Sony should have been filming Spider-Man 4 right now and not talking about doing a reboot. As for Bendis I'm no fan of his and why would Sony hired him in first place.
Probably because his run Ultimate Spider-Man is hugely popular.

[W.C.Reaf]

As for Bendis I'm no fan of his and why would Sony hired him in first place.

He's an extremely popular writer with a critically acclaimed run on Ultimate Spider-Man that has lasted about 140 issues and is still ongoing.

Probably the same reasons why they invited him, along with Stan Lee, to view a special screening of Spider-Man 1 with Sam Raimi.

[Rick Jones]

It seems like the hype around this movie has really died down for now.

[Old Guy]

It seems like the hype around this movie has really died down for now.

That's because there's no news. There's nothing to talk about at the moment.

[kid rabbit]

marvel wants to focus on the captain ameraca and iron man 2 coming out soon

[TMC1982]

I don't know if this has been said before, but would Emma Stone (http://www.wireimage.com/ItemListings.aspx?cbi=67098&igi=426121&nbc1=1) (Zombieland) be a good choice for Mary Jane Watson? She in my estmination (based on these photos (http://www.wireimage.com/ItemListings.aspx?cbi=67098&igi=426118&nbc1=1)), looks more like I would except MJ to look like (at least from a comics perspective) than say Kirsten Dunst in the Sam Raiimi films.

[Michael24]

I had no problems with Kirsten Dunst (if anything, it was the writing that was too blame and not Dunst), but Emma Stone looks like she'd be a good choice. I'd never heard of her before Zombieland, but I thought she was really good in that.

[Old Guy]

marvel wants to focus on the captain ameraca and iron man 2 coming out soon

Yes and no. Marvel doesn't actually control the Spider-Man franchise like they do with Captain America, Thor, and Iron Man. It's mostly SONY.


would Emma Stone (http://www.wireimage.com/ItemListings.aspx?cbi=67098&igi=426121&nbc1=1) (Zombieland) be a good choice for Mary Jane Watson?

Depends on who they cast as Spider-Man. If it's that Percy Jackson kid then I say no. Emma Stone looks like she can beat him up. lol. I think Kay Panabaker might be good:

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e329/MC03/Kay_Panabaker.jpg

[Rick Jones]

That's because there's no news. There's nothing to talk about at the moment.Hype machines have never really let that stop them before though.

I really couldn't even begin to think of someone that I'd currently like to see as MJ (who knows if she'll even be the main love interest). My criteria doesn't really seem that strict though. All it takes is a young actress who can pass for a high school or college student, has smoking good looks, looks passable in red, and can act well enough not to annoy me with every word that comes out of her mouth. Thanks to Chris Sims, the new Doctor's companion, from the upcoming season of Dr. Who, is stuck in my head.

[dmxx116]

Exclusive: 'Percy Jackson' star Logan Lerman frontrunner to be the new 'Spider-Man':
http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/it-s-over-folks-logan-lerman-is-spider-man
This kid will never be Spider-Man to me only Tobey Maguire and nobody else.

[suss2it]

Exclusive: 'Percy Jackson' star Logan Lerman frontrunner to be the new 'Spider-Man':
http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/it-s-over-folks-logan-lerman-is-spider-man
This kid will never be Spider-Man to me only Tobey Maguire and nobody else.Glad to see you're open-minded.

[KCJ506]

Tobey Maguire was okay, but no way is he the only one. I think Jake Gyllenhaal would make a decent Spidey. Too bad they're putting him back in high school.

[TMC1982]

Exclusive: 'Percy Jackson' star Logan Lerman frontrunner to be the new 'Spider-Man':
http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/it-s-over-folks-logan-lerman-is-spider-man
This kid will never be Spider-Man to me only Tobey Maguire and nobody else.

As skeptical as I am of the reboot (due in no certain terms to the modest $80 million budget the fact that Avi Arad (http://www.facebook.com/#%21/group.php?gid=115302051813254&ref=ts) and Laura Ziskin, who helped ruin the third movie by forcing Sam Raimi to include Venom and Gwen Stacy respectively, still around), Tobey Maguire couldn't play Peter Parker forever. I mean that would be like saying, that you'll never accept any actor other than Christopher Reeve as Superman. Or any actor other than Sean Connery as James Bond. Or any actor other than Michael Keaton as Batman.

[dmxx116]

John Malkovich talk about not playing The Vulture in Spider-Man 4 :
http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=9291

[rggkjg1]

As skeptical as I am of the reboot (due in no certain terms to the modest $80 million budget the fact that Avi Arad (http://www.facebook.com/#%21/group.php?gid=115302051813254&ref=ts) and Laura Ziskin, who helped ruin the third movie by forcing Sam Raimi to include Venom and Gwen Stacy respectively, still around), Tobey Maguire couldn't play Peter Parker forever. I mean that would be like saying, that you'll never accept any actor other than Christopher Reeve as Superman. Or any actor other than Sean Connery as James Bond. Or any actor other than Michael Keaton as Batman.
i guess this is a good time to bring up this point:

why is it ok for all the current superhero reboots/sequels/ect to recast the lead actor, when it's not ok to recast batman for val kilmer and then to george clooney? i dont know what's more puzzling, the fact that these films are going through with it, or that people just dont seem to care about the recasting (unless it's val kilmer or george clooney). joel schumacher's batman is reason why everyone should rightfully be skeptical in these similar situations.

when an actor plays an iconic character, the actor will suddenly be forever linked to this character. it's a big disservice to the character being casted if they just go and get someone else. the character is more important than just another role or the actor playing the character.

if your going to start over, get a new cast, ect, at least WAIT and let some time pass. tobey maguire can't play spider-man forever, but that doesn't mean they need to keep making spider-man movies forever either.

[Poweranimals]

The Batman movies weren't reboots. This will be so there's no need for the same cast.

[TMC1982]

i guess this is a good time to bring up this point:

why is it ok for all the current superhero reboots/sequels/ect to recast the lead actor, when it's not ok to recast batman for val kilmer and then to george clooney? i dont know what's more puzzling, the fact that these films are going through with it, or that people just dont seem to care about the recasting (unless it's val kilmer or george clooney). joel schumacher's batman is reason why everyone should rightfully be skeptical in these similar situations.

when an actor plays an iconic character, the actor will suddenly be forever linked to this character. it's a big disservice to the character being casted if they just go and get someone else. the character is more important than just another role or the actor playing the character.

if your going to start over, get a new cast, ect, at least WAIT and let some time pass. tobey maguire can't play spider-man forever, but that doesn't mean they need to keep making spider-man movies forever either.

The 1990s Batman situation was different in the sense that they weren't full blown reboots like the later Christopher Nolan films were. Joel Schumacher from my understanding, actually wanted to do a Batman Year 1 movie, but Warner Bros. insisted that there be a follow up to Batman Returns (perhaps because villains like the Riddler and Two-Face as well as Robin hadn't been used yet). I regard them more as like the James Bond films pre-Casino Royale. They still had the same core supporting casts, but were not direct sequels. For example, the James Bond that George Lazenby played in On Her Majesty's Secret Service, could possibly be the same one that Sean Connery played, but from a different/alternate point of view.

I was actually more bothered when George Clooney replaced Val Kilmer as Batman than when Val Kilmer replaced Michael Keaton. I guess I could easier except Batman Forever as being a quasi-reboot (since the overall production outside of Michael Gough and Pat Hingle still playing Alfred and Gordon respectively, is radically different) from the two Tim Burton films. Batman & Robin however, still had Chris O'Donnell playing Robin, still had Joel Schumacher directing, still had Elliot Goldenthal composing, still had Barbara Ling's production design, and yet some other guy is playing Bruce Wayne!?

[Old Guy]

The 1990s Batman situation was different in the sense that they weren't full blown reboots like the later Christopher Nolan films were.

The three sequels to `89 Batman aren't direct-sequels. Think of it like the James Bond series.


Joel Schumacher from my understanding, actually wanted to do a Batman Year 1 movie, but Warner Bros. insisted that there be a follow up to Batman Returns (perhaps because villains like the Riddler and Two-Face as well as Robin hadn't been used yet).

Schumacher was interested in adapting Batman: Year One, but that's not the movie he wanted to make in 1995. He said so on the DVD. He grew up on campy Batman and Batman Forever is his tribute to that.

[Kaveh77]

Logan Lerman was a good choice for Peter Parker he looks just like him

http://comicrelated.com/graphics/solicits/marvel/mar10/peterparker1.jpg


http://images.hitfix.com/photos/365512/LoganLermanThief_article_story_main.jpg

[dmxx116]

Alvin Sargent spit-shining 'Spider-Man' reboot (exclusive):

http://www.heatvisionblog.com/2010/05/alvin-sargent-spitshining-spiderman-reboot-exclusive-.html

This is a move that will backfire on Sony bigtime. (IMO)

[dmxx116]

Meet Jamie Bell,Alden Ehrenreich,Josh Hutcherson,Frank Dillane,Andrew Garfield all men who could play Spider-Man (exclusive)
http://www.heatvisionblog.com/2010/05/meet-the-men-who-could-play-spiderman.html
(IMO) none of those guys will never be good as Tobey Maguire.

[Rick Jones]

The only two I'm familiar with are Hutcherson and Bell. Hutcherson doesn't really seem like the Parker type to me. I have no idea how big he is but I could totally see him as a high school antagonist, who knows ? As they're going through with the high school reboot, I think it would be best to cast young and not get someone in the mid 20s. I'd alreayd kind of gotten used to the idea of Lerman as Spidey but it seems he's not in the running. I hope this won't be a casting process similar to Captain America's. The studio should just let the director pick his "muse" and stop looking for the net's seal of approval.

[dmxx116]

I hope this is not true that Donald Glover could be Spider-Man:
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk-twitter-campaign-wants-community-actor-to-be-first-non-white-spider-man.html

[W.C.Reaf]

It's just a twitter campaign based off a fairly stupid and inconsistent article, so there's nothing going to come of it.

I don't like Community so I wouldn't want to see Donald Glover be Spidey. If they get a good actor for the role then I'd probably like it, regardless of race, if they don't change the characters just for it.

[Superpan]

Donald Glover has a love for the character and, based off Community, could probably bring the wisecracks back, while still maintaining a serious tone.

That said, I just realized a problem. It would probably be very hard for me to buy him as a high school student. The problem in my mind is that it would have to be an unknown, because I can't think of any good actors who are age-appropriate for the role!

[RonDrakenfan17]

LOL Random choice.
They'd be changing Spider-Man a lot.
I don't like it :(

[Spideyzilla]

LOL Random choice.
They'd be changing Spider-Man a lot.
I don't like it :(

How? Because his skin color is different? I think it's a great idea, it would be a huge step forward for African Americans.

[W.C.Reaf]

Donald Glover has a love for the character and, based off Community, could probably bring the wisecracks back, while still maintaining a serious tone.

If they get a comedy actor doesn't mean it'll definitely have wise cracks in it. Sony executives were primarily the reason why there wasn't any in the previous films while in the games (where it's still Toby doing the voice) he throwing wisecracks around a plenty.

[RonDrakenfan17]

How? Because his skin color is different? I think it's a great idea, it would be a huge step forward for African Americans.

Well the reason why I don't like it, is cuz Peter was never that race, neither in the comics or the series. I mean, if they make a newer comics with Peter in that race than good. But they'd be randomly be changing his character for the films.

[SilverKnight]

Well the reason why I don't like it, is cuz Peter was never that race, neither in the comics or the series. I mean, if they make a newer comics with Peter in that race than good. But they'd be randomly be changing his character for the films.In "that race"? Are you attempting to be PC? I don't think you'll offend anyone by saying, "Peter wasn't black in the comics." By the way, skin color doesn't "change a person's character". I could be purple with yellow polka-dots, but I'm still gonna be me. I think I get what you're trying to say--you're used to him looking a certain way, but I'd rather a character look different and retain the inner qualities that make them who they are, than to be a visual spitting image that acts incredibly OOC the entire movie. Perhaps that's just personal opinion, though.

Anyway, back on point. I'm not entirely sure why they're rebooting a movie franchise that's like ten years old, if that. I mean, Batman Begins came out nearly ten years after the horrible Batman & Robin movie; Superman Returns, which was a weird amalgam of a sequel/reboot came out almost thirty years later. Why are they rebooting it while the current generation still sees Tobey as Spidey? Of course, I'll take a potentiallygood reboot over an assuredly crappy sequel any day of the week, so I guess there's no point in complaining.

[Michael24]

Well the reason why I don't like it, is cuz Peter was never that race, neither in the comics or the series. I mean, if they make a newer comics with Peter in that race than good. But they'd be randomly be changing his character for the films.
I agree. I know some people who have complained about Nick Fury being black in the Marvel films. However, Fury has been both black and white in the comics now, so there's a basis for featuring either one in a film.

But the way I see it, since Peter Parker has never been interpreted as a black character in the comics, there's no basis for it. Doing it in the film would just seem like the filmmakers going, "Ooh, look at us, we're being different. Aren't we clever?"

[darkdetective]

Ahh, so making the asian characters white in Airbender is horrible, but making a white character like Parker a different race is ok? No, it isn't. I have no problem with a black Captain America or a black Spidey or a black Batman (well, we have Black Panther already) but I don't like the idea of a black Steve Rogers, Peter Parker, or Bruce Wayne. How would you like it if Ororo was white? You'd freak. If they had somone else who called herself Storm, while it's not Ororo, but some white person, it wouldn't be as bad. People didn't freak out when there was a hispanic Blu Beetle. They would freak though, if Ted Kord was suddenly hispanic.

[Wonderwall]

How? Because his skin color is different? I think it's a great idea, it would be a huge step forward for African Americans.

I think that's bit of an exaggeration it is only just a movie. That being said it makes no sense to just randomly change a character's race just to do it. That being said I've never heard of this guy, I don't really care we all know he's not getting it just because of a useless twitter campaign.

[Spideyzilla]

I think that's bit of an exaggeration it is only just a movie.

I disagree. This is Spider-Man. It would be huge if an African American actor were to portray one of the biggest characters in history.

[KCJ506]

As a black person myself I will say this. Here's my thing of changing of race. I have a double standard

I didn't mind the Nick Fury change because this one is based off the Ultimate version which is based off SLJ himself.

I didn't mind the Kingpin change because where are you gonna find a white actor big enough and is actually right for the role? I heard they screen tested white actors and they all sucked.

I don't mind the change of Heimdall in Thor because he doesn't have his own series. He's just a supporting character who probably won't even have that much screentime. Who cares? I can't believe people are still complaining about this.

However there's no need a turn a major character into a different race. Not only is Spider-man a huge Marvel character he's iconic. And in a live action movie I would like Peter Parker to resemble his comic book counterpart as much as possible.

Instead of changing white major characters into blacks why not build up the minority characters? Why not make a Black Panther movie? Why not put Vixen or Static in a film? Where is the Luke Cage film that they were working so hard on?

Plus part of casting for a role involves the look. You also have to cast people who look right for the role. Glover doesn't. Simple as that. I wouldn't mind him being in the movie, if they have Hobie Brown play a bigger supporting role or Randy Robertson.


Ahh, so making the asian characters white in Airbender is horrible, but making a white character like Parker a different race is ok?

I'm sorry, but Last Airbender ISN'T iconic like Spider-man. Spider-man is one of the most recognizable fictional characters in media today. Last Airbender doesn't even compare.

[Rick Jones]

As a black person myself I will say this. Here's my thing of changing of race. I have a double standard

I didn't mind the Nick Fury change because this one is based off the Ultimate version which is based off SLJ himself.

I didn't mind the Kingpin change because where are you gonna find a white actor big enough and is actually right for the role? I heard they screen tested white actors and they all sucked.

I don't mind the change of Heimdall in Thor because he doesn't have his own series. He's just a supporting character who probably won't even have that much screentime. Who cares? I can't believe people are still complaining about this.

However there's no need a turn a major character into a different race. Not only is Spider-man a huge Marvel character he's iconic. And in a live action movie I would like Peter Parker to resemble his comic book counterpart as much as possible.

Instead of changing white major characters into blacks why not build up the minority characters? Why not make a Black Panther movie? Why not put Vixen or Static in a film? Where is the Luke Cage film that they were working so hard on?

Plus part of casting for a role involves the look. You also have to cast people who look right for the role. Glover doesn't. Simple as that. I wouldn't mind him being in the movie, if they have Hobie Brown play a bigger supporting role or Randy Robertson.This is pretty much exactly how I feel about this.

A really well done Luke Cage, for instance, could be a great showcase for actors of color that might not get much of a shot elsewhere.

[Jowy Blight]

Ahh, so making the asian characters white in Airbender is horrible, but making a white character like Parker a different race is ok? No, it isn't. I have no problem with a black Captain America or a black Spidey or a black Batman (well, we have Black Panther already) but I don't like the idea of a black Steve Rogers, Peter Parker, or Bruce Wayne. How would you like it if Ororo was white? You'd freak. If they had somone else who called herself Storm, while it's not Ororo, but some white person, it wouldn't be as bad. People didn't freak out when there was a hispanic Blu Beetle. They would freak though, if Ted Kord was suddenly hispanic.

The world and characters of the Last Airbender are very heavly rooted in asian influences. The way they dress, write, etc. shows that they are clearly asian people. Nothing about Peter Parker's character is tied to his race and trying to compare it to the Last Airbender is completely wrong. It also isn't like their haven't already been other changes to the universe before. The Spider-Man movies have changed a number of things around with no real issues. Peter was given organic webshooters and the backstories of various other characters were altered and the movies turned out just fine. Besides, it's not like this would be the first time they changed Peter Parker's race (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavitr_Prabhakar) and origin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man_(manga)).

Can someone seriously give one good reason why Spider-Man cannot be a non white character?


Plus part of casting for a role involves the look. You also have to cast people who look right for the role. Glover doesn't. Simple as that. I wouldn't mind him being in the movie, if they have Hobie Brown play a bigger supporting role or Randy Robertson.

It's funny how this doesn't stop Hollywood from turning non white characters into white people.

[KCJ506]

Here's another reason why Glover won't work and it's nothing to do with his race. It's his age. The reboot is supposed to be Ultimate Spider-Man, meaning high school Spider-Man. There are some actors, Nicholas D'Agosto and Aaron Yoo for example, who are in their 30's but still look like they could walk into a high school and pass for students. Donald Glover isn't one of them. He's in his late 20s and he looks it.

And before anyone comes at me about Tobey being 27 when the first movie, not only did Tobey look younger, but he was playing a senior that was about to graduate. A bit of a difference from someone who's nearly 30 and looks like it playing a 15 year old freshman/sophomore.

Glover actually looks his age and what about in 9 or 10 years? Look how old and frumpy Tobey started to look and people started to whine that he was too old. Casting another guy who'll actually be older than Tobey was when he started is doing the same thing.





Can someone seriously give one good reason why Spider-Man cannot be a non white character?



Because Peter Parker is too well-known and familiar to have a drastic change like making him black actually work. Nick Fury, Kingpin, and Heimdall in Thor are one thing. Unless you're a Marvel fan you likely don't even know who they are. It would also be a non-issue to have the Avengers make the Wasp black, or something. Comic book heroes really hit big in the 30's, 40's, 50's and 60's, and the idea that a black person would be portrayed as anything more than the Help was alien, leading to a serious dearth of black super-heroes. We need more, yes, and some heroes who are due for a personality makeover could successfully be made black in a movie with no problems. Just not Spider-Man. People who have never cracked open a comic book in their life know who Spider-Man is, and that was before there were movies (http://forums.henshinjustice.com/showthread.php?p=986076#) about him. To have Peter Parker suddenly be black would have movie fans and Spider-man fanboys across the world crying foul, and NOT because they're filthy racists, but because Spider-Man isn't black. It would be like having an A-Team movie and making BA Barracus white or doing a Blade reboot and have someone like Sam Worthington play him. You just don't do it.

I would be just as opposed to any drastic change to Peter Parker, such as having him live with his parents, letting Uncle Ben live, making him willing to kill, changing his powers drastically (giving him natural web-shooters wasn't that drastic a change), etc.

However, if you want to tell a story about a successor to the Spider-Man mask, and have that kid be black, that's totally okay with me. Super-heroes get successors all the time.

[Jowy Blight]

Because Peter Parker is too well-known and familiar to have a drastic change like making him black actually work. Nick Fury, Kingpin, and Heimdall in Thor are one thing. Unless you're a Marvel fan you likely don't even know who they are. It would also be a non-issue to have the Avengers make the Wasp black, or something. Comic book heroes really hit big in the 30's, 40's, 50's and 60's, and the idea that a black person would be portrayed as anything more than the Help was alien, leading to a serious dearth of black super-heroes. We need more, yes, and some heroes who are due for a personality makeover could successfully be made black in a movie with no problems. Just not Spider-Man. People who have never cracked open a comic book in their life know who Spider-Man is, and that was before there were movies (http://forums.henshinjustice.com/showthread.php?p=986076#) about him. To have Peter Parker suddenly be black would have movie fans and Spider-man fanboys across the world crying foul, and NOT because they're filthy racists, but because Spider-Man isn't black. It would be like having an A-Team movie and making BA Barracus white or doing a Blade reboot and have someone like Sam Worthington play him. You just don't do it.

I would be just as opposed to any drastic change to Peter Parker, such as having him live with his parents, letting Uncle Ben live, making him willing to kill, changing his powers drastically (giving him natural web-shooters wasn't that drastic a change), etc.

Fans complain about all changes regardless of how big or small, so there really wouldn't be any difference. Also, how does any of this tie into Peter Parker's character? What about the character says that he needs to be white other then him being drawn that way back in the 60's? How is his characterization tied to him being white? I really don't care how the fans will react. I want to know why Peter Parker being white is so important to his characterization.

[KCJ506]

Fans complain about all changes regardless of how big or small, so there really wouldn't be any difference. Also, how does any of this tie into Peter Parker's character? What about the character says that he needs to be white other then him being drawn that way back in the 60's? How is his characterization tied to him being white? I really don't care how the fans will react. I want to know why Peter Parker being white is so important to his characterization.

There's a difference between changing things like characterizations of the characters from what they are a bit in the comics than it is from wanting Peter Parker to actually look like Peter Parker.

I'm not gonna lie and say that Peter's race has something to do with his origin, but he was made a certain way and should stay that way. Major changes like this to an iconic character is unwelcome because people love the source material and want the characters to actually resemble those of the source material. A change of race for such a major character is really unnecessary. Peter Parker has been white for over 40 years. Even if his skin tone doesn't in any way, shape or form affect the character's background and/or personality, I don't want to see it changed. I wouldn't wanna see Blade or Spawn played by white actors either.

If Parker does become black then what about MJ and Gwen? How about Uncle Ben and Aunt May? This reminds me of when Terrance Howard was the first person to be cast in the entire movie (http://forums.henshinjustice.com/showthread.php?p=985751&highlight=spawn#), before Downey Jr and even before Favreau. And naturally a million posts popped up about Howard playing Stark, and I knew he wasn't going to be Stark because if he's Stark then who was going to play Rhodey? A white actor? You change one thing, you might have to change other things.

[Mistah K88]

As a black person myself I will say this. Here's my thing of changing of race. I have a double standard

I didn't mind the Nick Fury change because this one is based off the Ultimate version which is based off SLJ himself.

I didn't mind the Kingpin change because where are you gonna find a white actor big enough and is actually right for the role? I heard they screen tested white actors and they all sucked.

I don't mind the change of Heimdall in Thor because he doesn't have his own series. He's just a supporting character who probably won't even have that much screentime. Who cares? I can't believe people are still complaining about this.

However there's no need a turn a major character into a different race. Not only is Spider-man a huge Marvel character he's iconic. And in a live action movie I would like Peter Parker to resemble his comic book counterpart as much as possible.

Instead of changing white major characters into blacks why not build up the minority characters? Why not make a Black Panther movie? Why not put Vixen or Static in a film? Where is the Luke Cage film that they were working so hard on?

Plus part of casting for a role involves the look. You also have to cast people who look right for the role. Glover doesn't. Simple as that. I wouldn't mind him being in the movie, if they have Hobie Brown play a bigger supporting role or Randy Robertson.


I'm also a black guy and I agree full heartedly. I also have double standards when it comes to this. I applauded when minor characters were race lifted in the cartoon Spectacular Spider-Man. Heck I actually prefer Roderick Kingsley to be a black man (as you could probably see from my avatar). You could ask even casual comic readers who is Fancy Dan, Debra Whitman, Roderick Kingsley, Liz Allan, Ned Leeds, Miles Warren, Jean Dewolff, etc. and they would have no idea or even care who they really are, so they could be changed as they are not iconic. People like Peter Parker, Otto Octavius, Norman Osborn, etc, have somewhat of a defined look to them that people recoginze. If Peter or Osborn had blonde hair there would be an outrage as well.

[RonDrakenfan17]

Litsen, like I said if the comic books had Peter be black from the start I'd have been fine with it. That's not his character though, you'd be changing every thing around. Maybe if they make a new comic book series with a black Spider-Man that'd be cool.

[Jowy Blight]

^^^^How does being white matter to Peter Parker's character?


There's a difference between changing things like characterizations of the characters from what they are a bit in the comics than it is from wanting Peter Parker to actually look like Peter Parker.

I'm not gonna lie and say that Peter's race has something to do with his origin, but he was made a certain way and should stay that way. Major changes like this to an iconic character is unwelcome because people love the source material and want the characters to actually resemble those of the source material. A change of race for such a major character is really unnecessary. Peter Parker has been white for over 40 years. Even if his skin tone doesn't in any way, shape or form affect the character's background and/or personality, I don't want to see it changed. I wouldn't wanna see Blade or Spawn played by white actors either.

If Parker does become black then what about MJ and Gwen? How about Uncle Ben and Aunt May? This reminds me of when Terrance Howard was the first person to be cast in the entire movie (http://forums.henshinjustice.com/showthread.php?p=985751&highlight=spawn#), before Downey Jr and even before Favreau. And naturally a million posts popped up about Howard playing Stark, and I knew he wasn't going to be Stark because if he's Stark then who was going to play Rhodey? A white actor? You change one thing, you might have to change other things.

Ok, so you simply don't like change. That's fine on a personal level, but it isn't a good enough reason as to why Spider-Man can't be a non white character. You've pretty much said yourslf that nothing about Peter would really change character wise if he were made black. Spider-Man has been around a long time and has had many different incarnations. I don't think a black version of the character would be the end of him. I would also think that the majority of the people who enjoy Spider-Man do so because of his characterization and not because of his skin tone. So I'm still not seeing why Spider-Man can't be black or any other race.

As for changing his supporting cast, it's been done before too. The only real reason they were all white to begin with is because of how things were at the time the comic was created.

Also, if Howard had played Stark, I wouldn't have had a problem with a white Rhodey. Though it would have been a shame to never have seen RDJ's Stark.

[firefoxprime]

I agree. I know some people who have complained about Nick Fury being black in the Marvel films. However, Fury has been both black and white in the comics now, so there's a basis for featuring either one in a film.

But the way I see it, since Peter Parker has never been interpreted as a black character in the comics, there's no basis for it. Doing it in the film would just seem like the filmmakers going, "Ooh, look at us, we're being different. Aren't we clever?"

I have absolutely no problem with that. "tradition" keeps people from embracing new experiences.


Ahh, so making the asian characters white in Airbender is horrible, but making a white character like Parker a different race is ok? No, it isn't. I have no problem with a black Captain America or a black Spidey or a black Batman (well, we have Black Panther already) but I don't like the idea of a black Steve Rogers, Peter Parker, or Bruce Wayne. How would you like it if Ororo was white? You'd freak. If they had somone else who called herself Storm, while it's not Ororo, but some white person, it wouldn't be as bad. People didn't freak out when there was a hispanic Blu Beetle. They would freak though, if Ted Kord was suddenly hispanic.

hmm...regardless of the level of popularity of a series, true adaptation is
necessary. of course this is Hollywood. Majority of the frontrunners
are caucasian people. Of course, the times are changing....
*points to white house.*


I think that's bit of an exaggeration it is only just a movie. That being said it makes no sense to just randomly change a character's race just to do it. That being said I've never heard of this guy, I don't really care we all know he's not getting it just because of a useless twitter campaign.

i dunno....if produced right, a movie can have a very influential part on a person, city or country.
ex: Avatar??, The Dark Knight, Breakfast Club, Lord of the Rings, Miyazaki films?, Ferris Bueller's Day Off?
list goes on...

pretty important films. especially when a film is parodied.
erhmm..."The Matrix".:cool:

[Michael24]

I have absolutely no problem with that. "tradition" keeps people from embracing new experiences.
If they want new experiences, that's fine. Just create a new character or use an appropriate one instead of changing an iconic one just because you can.

[TMC1982]

Fans complain about all changes regardless of how big or small, so there really wouldn't be any difference. Also, how does any of this tie into Peter Parker's character? What about the character says that he needs to be white other then him being drawn that way back in the 60's? How is his characterization tied to him being white? I really don't care how the fans will react. I want to know why Peter Parker being white is so important to his characterization.

The ironic thing about this is that the Spectacular Spider-Man animated series, altered several supporting characters ethnicities:
*Ned Leeds became Ned Lee, a Korean
*Liz Allan went from having blonde hair, to being Puerto Rican
*Deb Whitman went from having blonde hair, to being African American
*Kenny "King Kong" McFarlane went from being African American to being being Asian and renamed Kenny Kong
*Roderick Kingsley, the Hobgoblin, goes from being a white man to being African American
*Jean DeWolff, went from being a white woman to being Native American

[W.C.Reaf]

The ironic thing about this is that the Spectacular Spider-Man animated series, altered several supporting characters ethnicities:

Well I wouldn't really call that irony.

The producers of the series recognised that Peter's supporting cast was 90% white which doesn't reflect New York, the most ethnically diverse city on the planet. So they had a look at the massive amount of supporting characters there is and picked ones whose looks aren't iconic and changed them. The guys in charge knew that they should reflect the world Peter is living in, but also that some characters have iconic looks and those shouldn't be changed.

I like that they went for proper ethnic diversity in using Hispanic, Asian, Native and African American's rather than just making a few black characters like other shows.


*Kenny "King Kong" McFarlane went from being African American to being being Asian and renamed Kenny Kong

Kenny was never black in the comics. If he was then they'd have used him like that instead of changing a minority into another minority.

[Young Justice]

Kenny was never black in the comics. If he was then they'd have used him like that instead of changing a minority into another minority.

Maybe they changed because an African American with a nickname of King Kong could be racial offensive.

Since Kong is an eastern name, they changed the guy for an Asian American ethnicity.

[W.C.Reaf]

Maybe they changed because an African American with a nickname of King Kong could be racial offensive.

Since Kong is an eastern name, they changed the guy for an Asian American ethnicity.

He's not black. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenny_McFarlane)

They might have made he Asian American in the show because of the Kong nickname from the comics, but he's still never been black in the comics.

[wins2x]

Are you sure he's not, because he's definitely not white. If anything he looks more Hispanic, but I think the point still stands.

[Mistah K88]

Are you sure he's not, because he's definitely not white. If anything he looks more Hispanic, but I think the point still stands.

Kenny McFarlane was white. I'm sure if he wasn't they wouldn't have race lifted him to an Asian if he was already a minority.

In fact, EVERY minority in that show save for the Robertsons, Hobie Brown, Glory Grant, and Sha Shan Nguyen were originally white in comics.

Fancy Dan of the Enforcers, Dr. Bromwell, Principal Davis, Roderick Kingsley, and Debra Whitman are black

Jean Dewolff is Native American

Liz Allan and Mark Raxton (Allan in show) are now Latino (Puerto Rican) and I'm tempted to say Ox of the Enforcers is Latino as well due to his voice actor and skin color.

Ned Leeds (Lee in show) is Korean and Kenny McFarlane (Kong in show) is Asian (Maybe Chinese as the surname is quite common) as well.

I'm unsure of what race Aaron and Miles Warren are, they are clearly tanned and their voice actor is Brian George who normally plays roles for people of South Asian (Pakistani, Indian, Afghan, etc) decent.

Now I feel that these characters above that were changed were minor and didn't have a lot of history about their lives that defines them all that much. We know LOADS about Norman Osborn's family history (comes from "old money" [meaning he has to be white], just his father lost it), yet we know next to nothing about Roderick Kingsley. While Peter probably doesn't have any defining characteristics that he would HAVE to be white, he does have an iconic look. People know who Peter Parker is, people don't know too much about the characters who've had their race changed in Spectacular Spider-Man. I mean like anyone cares about Principal Davis... And that is the right way to go about this I believe, mess with minor characters in Spidey lore. I think the biggest one on that list was Roderick Kingsley and even then, by the time he was truly unmaked I'm pretty sure that the man behind the mask of the Hobgoblin didn't matter (though making him black gives him a completely different family history than Norman Osborn, which I say the more differences the better).

[Peter Paltridge]

Look, there's an easy solution to this. A DC solution, but maybe they'll let Sony borrow the machine.

http://www.comics.org/issue/23852/cover/4/?style=default

[Rick Jones]

That's a pretty groovy outfit Lois is wearing. Must have been the look for 60s newswoman on the go.

[Baseball]

It's surprising how many people are up in arms in this versus the controversy of the Last Airbender. Unlike the world of Avatar, race has nothing to do with Spider-Man's identity. Peter Parker is a nerd in New York, but the color of his skin doesn't have to do with who he is as a hero. This isn't like changing the race of a person whose cultural identity is integral to their character, like the Prince of Persia or the Avatar world.

[the greenman]

Funny, I wasn't paying attention to all the posts, and assumed you guys were talking about Danny Glover. Who I could actually see as J.Jonah Jameson.

[NewcomerDC]

Brooding teenager party of one? http://my.spill.com/profiles/blogs/bell-to-play-peter-parker
When I saw his picture on the front page of Spill.com, I said to myself that I couldn't see him as the web-slinger.

[Spider-Man]

Looks like Electro will be the villain for Spider-Man 4/reboot:

Michael Fassbender: Choice Between Spider Man and X Men

http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/06/08/michael-fassbender-choice-between-spider-man-and-x-men

Sony wants him for Electro and Fox wants him for Magneto. I wonder which he'll choose.

[mr.happy]

Brooding teenager party of one? http://my.spill.com/profiles/blogs/bell-to-play-peter-parker
When I saw his picture on the front page of Spill.com, I said to myself that I couldn't see him as the web-slinger.Bell has an almost creepy, unlikable sort of look that makes him completely wrong for Spider-Man. He could make a decent villain, though.

[CyclonatorZ]

Brooding teenager party of one? http://my.spill.com/profiles/blogs/bell-to-play-peter-parker
When I saw his picture on the front page of Spill.com, I said to myself that I couldn't see him as the web-slinger.

So, despite this being a reboot, they're going in the exact same direction they did with the first three - choosing an adult to play a teenager.

Seriously, the only reason Tobey Maguire didn't raise as big of a fuss as it could have was because only the first half of the first movie actually dealt with him as a teenager. And yet, many people still weren't happy - and now we're going to have one (and possibly more) movies that have an adult trying to be teen Parker.

So much for "righting the wrongs of the past." :shrug:

[W.C.Reaf]

Brooding teenager party of one? http://my.spill.com/profiles/blogs/bell-to-play-peter-parker
When I saw his picture on the front page of Spill.com, I said to myself that I couldn't see him as the web-slinger.

That'll be interesting for me since he's from the same place as me (or the town right next to mine) and he's only 6 months older than me. But I can't really see a 24 year old playing a high school kid for these movies (if that's still what Sony has planned).

Still it's a better choice than the rumours about that Twilight guy getting it all those months ago. :shrug:

[NewcomerDC]

Still it's a better choice than the rumours about that Twilight guy getting it all those months ago. :shrug:
Who the heck wanted Edward Cullen to be Spider-Man?

[W.C.Reaf]

Looks like Electro will be the villain for Spider-Man 4/reboot:

Michael Fassbender: Choice Between Spider Man and X Men

http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/06/08/michael-fassbender-choice-between-spider-man-and-x-men

Sony wants him for Electro and Fox wants him for Magneto. I wonder which he'll choose.

Electro? An interesting choice for the villain. If this is based off of Ultimate then he'd be the minion of the main crime lord, whoever they get for that (since they can't use Kingpin because his rights are with Fox).

[Kaveh77]

Electros not a bad choice happy they're not doing Green Goblin again. I hope they do the Spectacular Spiderman Electro. He's probably the only one that doesn't look like a complete joke. Lets hope to god they dont do the one that was in Mtv's Spiderman

[the greenman]

Electros not a bad choice happy they're not doing Green Goblin again. I hope they do the Spectacular Spiderman Electro. He's probably the only one that doesn't look like a complete joke. Lets hope to god they dont do the one that was in Mtv's Spiderman

Exactly my thoughts when I read this. It's just sounding awfully familiar to me. That Electro was like Darkwing Duck's Electroduck. Never cared for him. Oh well, as mentioned at least it isn't a retread of Raimi's Spider-Man. I wonder if they'll use Kingpin for the Spider-Man films?

[W.C.Reaf]

I wonder if they'll use Kingpin for the Spider-Man films?

They can't because he's part of the Daredevil license that Fox has. Just Spider-Man can't appear in The Avengers film because of Sony Kingpin, Daredevil, Ben Urich, and any other Daredevil character can't appear outside a Fox film.

The irony is that Kingpin and Ben Urich were Spider-Man characters in the beginning. But legally they're part of the Daredevil set of characters that Fox has and thems the breaks.

[Silverstar]

Electro was like Darkwing Duck's Electroduck. Never cared for him.

Electroduck? Never heard of him. Is he from the comics? The only electric powered character that I know of from Darkwing Duck is Megavolt, who's not a duck.

http://pressthebuttons.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83452033569e20120a539497b970b-800wi

Anyways, Electro's no worse choice than the Sandman. At least it's not the Green Goblin again.

[Spider-Man]

Now it looks like The Lizard may be the bad guy in the new Spider-Man movie:



From the same sources that brought you both the Jamie Bell Spider-Man rumour and subsequent dissection of Sony’s policy, plans and back-up plans, comes news on the Spider-Man 4 big villain. So, you know, playing on slightly shaky ground still. But that’s Bleeding Cool for you.

That came of the back of news from Roger Friedman that Michael Fassbender has been given a choice between playing Magneto and a Spider-Man villain.

Not as we laughingly suggested yesterday, Elektro. But another of the Sinister Six, Dr Curt Conners, otherwise known as The Lizard.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/06/09/the-lizard-as-big-bad-in-spider-man-4/

[rggkjg1]

Now it looks like The Lizard may be the bad guy in the new Spider-Man movie:
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/06/09/the-lizard-as-big-bad-in-spider-man-4/
i don't think i can give this article any source of credibility if they can't spell ELECTRO'S name correctly or still call the movie spider-man 4 when we all know that the new movie is a reboot (yes, its the 4th overall spider-man movie, but you get the picture).

[Matt Hazuda]

Stan Lee has some thoughts (http://splashpage.mtv.com/2010/06/09/stan-lee-donald-glover-spider-man-casting-campaign/) on the Donald Glover campaign.



"He's a great actor. I've seen him, and he's terrific," Lee said of Glover.

"A lot of [my Twitter followers] have been saying that he ought to have a chance to audition for the role," he said. "So I tweeted back by saying, as far as I'm concerned ... anybody should have a chance to audition for the role. I certainly think he should have a chance to audition."

However, Lee made sure to clarify that he wasn't advocating for Glover or any other specific actor to get the role.And specifically about the race issue, he had this to say

As for the racial aspect of the debate, Lee brushed it off, saying that casting Peter Parker "shouldn't be a racial issue." However, he added that drastically changing Peter Parker's appearance could risk confusing audiences — but that shouldn't stop anyone from giving Glover or other non-white actors a shot.Lee also mentions the fact that there's been a black Kingpin and Nick Fury already, but the movie fans weren't as familiar with them to begin with, so that's why it wasn't as problematic.

[launchpad20]

Electroduck? Never heard of him. Is he from the comics? The only electric powered character that I know of from Darkwing Duck is Megavolt, who's not a duck.

http://pressthebuttons.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83452033569e20120a539497b970b-800wi

Anyways, Electro's no worse choice than the Sandman. At least it's not the Green Goblin again.Well, there's also Negaduck, who Megavolt accidently created from his 'tron splitter' device after a failed attempt to zap Darkwing Duck into oblivion. This version of Negaduck had electrical powers derived from Megavolt's powers if that's what your referring to. In other appearances, Negaduck was just Darkwing's 'evil twin'.

[kdmccaskill]

REVIEW: The Spider-Man Reboot Script
(This is NOT MY Review) Follow the jump to find out how the script for the controversial Spider-Man reboot possibly plays out...
I was just searching through YouTube for G4's reaction to the news about the reboot just to pass the time when I came across this. Apparently, this guy got a sneak peek at the script by James Vanderbilt for the reboot.



In case you guys didn't know, Mr. Vanderbilt was responsible for writing the recently scrapped script for 'Spider-Man 4' and was also engaged by Sony to write for the fifth and sixth installments afterwards. After Raimi left, he wrote the script for the new 'gritty and contemporary' Spider-Man film.

Keep in mind this was from January 15th of this year. The day at which it was confirmed that 'Spider-Man 4' was scrapped was on January 13th, two days earlier. And James had already written the script before Sam pulled out since Sony wanted to reboot the series after the fourth endeavor.

Please, just humor me and listen.



If this guy is telling the truth then I really, really, really like what I'm hearing. I am hoping that what ever changes Alvin Sargent or Marc makes on the screenplay doesn't defeat the quality. Alvin co-wrote the past three Spidey films so there is no reason I shouldn't have any faith in him, especially with Mr. Webb directing.

To remind you all, I don't know whether this guy is telling the truth or not. I hope this doesn't diminish my credibility here in this site.

So sound off below. Do you think this guy is legitimate or do you think he was just trying to shut the barking fans up at the time.


http://comicbookmovie.com/fansites/AverageCitizen99/news/?a=19436


The guy said Gwen is the love interest and M.J is the friend, and he said it's just like spectacular spiderman


first of all if gwen is the love interest and M.J is the friend that sounds like Ultimate Spiderman, not Spec spidey


either this guy can't tell the difference between, or he is lying

[NewcomerDC]

First of all if Gwen is the love interest and M.J.'s the friend that sounds like Ultimate Spider-Man, not Spectacular Spider-Man.
While Gwen and Peter broke up in the second and final season of Spectacular Spider-Man, they did show signs of wanting to be back together as a couple but because of the "death" of Norman Osborne, Gwen felt trapped for she wanted to console Harry yet he vowed to get his revenge against Spider-Man (Peter). Sure, in that series there might had been a possibility of M.J. and Peter being together but, as far as I remember, they were friends.

[Superpan]

No, for most of Ultimate Spider-Man, it was the opposite. Peter and Mary-Jane were talking about getting married someday. It was only recently did Gwen and Peter get together. Gwen was the main love interest in the show though.

[NewcomerDC]

No, for most of Ultimate Spider-Man, it was the opposite. Peter and Mary-Jane were talking about getting married someday. It was only recently did Gwen and Peter get together. Gwen was the main love interest in the show though.
Oh, see I'm someone who don't read Ultimate Spider-Man and was only thinking about what happened in the Spectacular Spider-Man Animated Series to reply to kdmccaskill's comment regarding the script of the reboot.

[kdmccaskill]

A new post from him on CBM, some may find it interesting.

Quote:
Wow so much to respond to. So I will try to respond to the questions that were asked. I didnt post this video on this site because I was not a member of it and I wouldnt know how to. You all have to realize that Vanderbuilt was rehired by sony wayyyyy before the cancellation of spider-man 4 to do a script with a blueprint for a reboot in mind. Sony already had plans to reboot the series right after a fourth movie was made. If you dont believe me then google it and im sure for those of you fans who have been following the news remember the article on it. I totally understand how some of you might not believe me but watch the video prior to my review and notice that I was the very first person to break out the news that spider-man 4 was going to be cancelled, nikki finke from deadline hollywood posted an article about how everyone of us got a letter than there are some issues between sam raimi and the studios with the storyline. Yet meanwhile between the studios and toby they came out and stated that the fourth film is not being cancelled and its a " Holiday Hiatus ". To be perfectly honest, that was a TRUE LIE. Its called hollywood politics. Also the MAIN reason as to why I couldnt give specific details is because I would get into legal issues and that also goes for anyone else in the filming industry. Trust me that some people got tempted to say things because you had your average " Well this man is full of ***** " taunts and before you know it the man spilled the beans to prove his point then later faced the consequences and for what ? To prove a point that he knew something ? Not worth getting into legal disputes or destroy your career just to prove something. You would also be disrespecting sony, marvel, and all of the people who work really hard to make this film. Besides, everyone knows that with script revisions there are ALWAYS changes.Thats why sometimes people keep thier mouths shut because if they get the smallest details wrong, they get ****ped on and called a phony. Spider-Man 2 had several script revisions as well as changes in villains. Spider-Man 3 had MAJOR changes and so did spider-man 4. You can see that for yourself because these scripts are availible to the public for the exception of spider-man 4 because its not out yet. I also believe that even James camersons script is also out there. As far as to what Alvin Sargeant and marc webb are doing as of right now or what changes were made, I have no idea. You would have to be an idiot to not follow the simple basic formula's that were the missing links in sam raimi's version. Which is gwen stacy as a first love interest, the whitty comebacks, and the idea that the majority of trouble peter / spider-man gets into is because of his own faults and has to deal with the consequences of it. Maybe they might change it to a love triangle betweem mj and gwen, or maybe they might change it all together. I am hoping that they dont change any of it. I am 100 % postive that the root they are going for the new reboot is completely different from sam raimis version and more like the spectacular and ultimate series. If I am wrong, I will eat the daily bugle paper and video it. Thats how sure I am of it. Thats the one aspect that will not change in the script because its peter parker / Spiderman begins and not a sequel to sam raimis films.


After i call him out of his b.s. about not knowing if it's based on Spec spidey or ultimate


Now he says it's a combination of Ultimate spiderman and Spec. spidey


This guy is a scam artist seeking Attn.

[underdog]

Screen tests just about done, Sony is now viewing them, the decision shall come soon!:



By MIKE FLEMING (http://www.deadline.com/new-york/) | Saturday June 26, 2010 @ 10:31pm EDT

http://www-deadline-com.vimg.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/spiderman21-300x225.jpgEXCLUSIVE: Sony's Columbia Pictures is getting closer to finding its new Spider-Man. On Friday, studio decision-makers viewed the screen tests of most of the young actors they are seriously considering to play Peter Parker in the Marc Webb-directed relaunch of Spider-Man.
I’m told that nobody has won the job yet. It is possible that more candidates will be added. But there is a strong list of actors who screen tested, and most likely the new Peter Parker is among them. I'm told that the candidates whose screen tests were viewed Friday are: Jamie Bell (the Billy Elliot star who wrapped the Kevin Macdonald-directed The Eagle of the Ninth) , Star Trek’s Anton Yelchin, Kick-Ass’s Aaron Johnson, Andrew Garfield (The Social Network), Logan Lerman (Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief) and Alden Ehrenreich (Tetro). Frank Dillane (Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince) and Michael Angerano (Lords of Dogtown) are also in the final list that the studio is working from. I'm not sure if Angerano tested. I've heard Dillane decided not to because he is likely headed to attend drama school at London’s Royal Academy of Dramatic Art.
The studio wants to lock in its superhero soon, so that supporting roles can be cast around him. Production will begin before the year ends and the film has locked a July 3, 2012 release. The script by Jamie Vanderbilt is still being worked on, and (500) Days of Summer director Marc Webb is gearing up for a 3D shoot.
The prep time is useful for Webb, who has no experience in blockbuster or 3D fare. Despite this, the studio and producers Laura Ziskin and Avi Arad sparked to him because (500) Days of Summer convinced them Webb could relate how a young Peter Parker would think and feel, coming to grips with his enormous power while dealing with the usual teenage dilemmas. This was considered as important as the action sequences. Webb emerged as the choice shortly after Sony scrapped plans for a fourth installment of Spider-Man with Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire. When Raimi decided not to go forward, the studio turned to a script that Vanderbilt wrote for the Raimi-Maguire franchise. Raimi didn’t love, but Sony did, and the studio used that as the catalyst to re-launch the franchise. The studio had no comment.


http://www.deadline.com/2010/06/sony-views-screen-tests-of-spider-man-finalists-decision-expected-shortly/

[TMC1982]

Now it looks like The Lizard may be the bad guy in the new Spider-Man movie:




http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/06/09/the-lizard-as-big-bad-in-spider-man-4/

It's kind of unfortunate that Lizard is possibly going to be in the reboot instead of the Raimi series. They already had Dylan Baker as a pre-mutated Curt Connors, but they ran out of time. To me, Spider-Man 3 should've been Vulture and Sandman as Sam Raimi allegedly wanted (before the powers that be forced him to include Venom in Vulture's place) with Spider-Man 4 being about Lizard and Kraven (who would be the "real villain", and in to hunt the Lizard).

[kid rabbit]

can't anyone think of a better plot for the lizard than kraven hunts the lizard
I've heard this tired idea on every spidy forum spider man 4 to spectalur spiderman season 3 ideas

[KCJ506]

If Lizard does show up in the reboot it shows that Sony is a bunch of hypocrites. Raimi wanted to use him. He had a story for him and he and Baker talked about transforming Connors into the Lizard. But Sony didn't want him because he was "too odd looking" and "didn't have a human face."

[TMC1982]

If Lizard does show up in the reboot it shows that Sony is a bunch of hypocrites. Raimi wanted to use him. He had a story for him and he and Baker talked about transforming Connors into the Lizard. But Sony didn't want him because he was "too odd looking" and "didn't have a human face."

I just hope that Avi Arad (or Laura "Put Gwen Stacy in the Movie" Ziskin) wasn't leading the charge in the "we can't use the Lizard" sentiment. I in part, blame him for the considerably poor quality of Spider-Man 3 for forcing Sam Raimi to shoehorn Venom in the first place.

[kdmccaskill]

Update:


he posted this

Just think of the film as paying homage to ult and spec series not a DIRECT storyline. Everyone keeps asking me which storyline its based on but, I tried to give hints as to how certain characters in the marvel universe had a mix of certain series. I gave an perfect example of nick fury from the iron man films that was based on ultimate version. Venom that had a mixture of both classic and ultimate.


Don't assume that with what I mentioned that the film will entirely be based on the ultimate or spec storylines. Just take the incredible hulk film. It paid homage to the classic bill bixby tv show but was it anything like the tv show ? nope. it was a movie on its own. For the record no one took down my video, I was asked to. They are still doing revisions on the script as well so no one will know anything until its finished. I cannot discuss anything further than what I have just stated.



As far as my opinion as to which series its leaning more towards to I would say spectacular spider-man. I just hope that I don't get bad press after this because I love what they are doing with the movie and my mission for spider-man fans was to give hope and answers to those who have patiently been waiting for news since the development of spider-man 4. I also feel bad for putting down marc webb in the video back in January from what I have heard his passion towards this movie and the love of the characters is just as powerful as Sam raimis was.


I know that most of you might disagree about Sam raimis passion for the spider-man films but he did give us two epic films and the third film wasn't really his fault. For the record he did NOT despise the character of Venom, he just wasn't familiar with the character and more of a fan of the classic villains. I know that Sony will make up for all of it in this reboot.


There you go he says it will be based more on spectacular spiderman more than Ultimate, well consider this movie a Epic failure, don't waste your money on this time bomb

[W.C.Reaf]

There you go he says it will be based more on spectacular spiderman more than Ultimate, well consider this movie a Epic failure, don't waste your money on this time bomb

He? He who? At least source your quotes and put some sort of link to where you got it from.

Use a quote box as well so it’s obvious your quoting someone.

[M.O.D.O.K.]

There you go he says it will be based more on spectacular spiderman more than Ultimate, well consider this movie a Epic failure, don't waste your money on this time bomb

In the VERY unlikely case this was right, if anything, that would get MORE fans interested in the reboot.

[underdog]

Alright, so this Disney Blogger named Honor Hunter who I've been following the past few years, is pretty dependable on all things Disney, is now reporting that Josh Hutcherson has been crowned as the next Peter Parker. You heard it from him first:

http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/06/journey-of-peter-parker.html

Time will tell if this holds to be true.

[NewcomerDC]

Alright, so this Disney Blogger named Honor Hunter who I've been following the past few years, is pretty dependable on all things Disney, is now reporting that Josh Hutcherson has been crowned as the next Peter Parker. You heard it from him first:

http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/06/journey-of-peter-parker.html

Time will tell if this holds to be true.
Aaron Johnson would had been better. Then we would had probably seen an Ultimate Spider-Man/Kick-Ass crossover.

[Kaveh77]

If this becomes a successful copy of Spectacular Spider-Man It'll probably become my favorite superhero movie of all time.

[ToonFaithful]

Andrew Garfield is the next Spider-Man! (http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/103264-its-official-andrew-garfield-to-play-spider-man)

He looks like he can fit the role....

Your thoughts?

[PowerZord]

Doesn't look that young even if he's 26

[Fett One]

Andrew Garfield is the next Spider-Man! (http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/103264-its-official-andrew-garfield-to-play-spider-man)

He looks like he can fit the role....

Your thoughts?


The thing I am curios about is, if Sony wanted a teenage Spidey for the next movie then why did they pick this guy since he is 27? He's too old for the part, which makes casting him a weird decision. However, whether or not he makes a good Peter Parker, we will just have to wait and see.

[mr.happy]

I don't like him. Not only does he have a freakishly long neck, which makes me wonder if he might not be a better fit for the (surely?) soon to be announced remake of E.T., but he looks more like a villain than any incarnation of Spider-Man I can think of. I would rather they'd gone with someone who's the actual age of the character he's meant to play. This guy is going to be in his 30s by the time a second movie rolls around.

Gotta admit, he put in an impressive performance at the audition, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6OEbhLC2Ik

[Kaveh77]

I dont know he looks a little too old to play a high school Peter Parker. Well I guess It all depends on how good of an actor he is.

[dmxx116]

Andrew Garfield is going to suck as Spider-Man I don't like this move one bit, Even on his best day he'll never be as good as Tobey Maguire when was Spider-Man I see nothing good coming from this reboot it all.

[GWOtaku]

He's around the same age as Maguire was. I'm unfamiliar with him, so I'll wait and see how he performs. And yes, while I liked Maguire, I certainly don't think his performance is untouchable.

They decided to reboot Spidey folks. What's done is done. There's no point hating on something simply because it's different.

[Tobias]

If they can do a Spider-Man film every 2 years as opposed to every 2 - 4 years, they can get quite a few SM adventures out before Garfield ages out of the role.

But still, I'd rather have Logan Lerman in the role. He's only 18, a hell of an actor, and he'd be able to do a LOT of Spider-Man movies before he got too old to move on.

[KCJ506]

The setting might change from high school to college.

http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/breaking-sony-pictures-announces-andrew-garfield-for-spider-man


He's older than I would have expected based on the casting speculation surrounding this film. Most of the final candidates are genuine teenagers, while Garfield is 27 right now. Originally, the Jamie Vanderbilt script for this film had Peter Parker as a high school student, and the assumption was that Sony would cast young so that they could do several films over the course of high school and college, a la the Brian Bendis take in "Ultimate Spider-Man." What we're hearing now though is that Parker starts the series as a college student, and that makes more sense with this casting


That's probably why they went with an older actor.

[dmxx116]

I don't like this pic at all with them looking all happy like Spider-Man is going to be the biggest movie in 2012 I don't see it The Avenger, Men in Black 3, Star Trek and Batman 3 and a bunch of other movies will be bigger then the Spider-Man Reboot in 2012 , And hope it fails like Jonah Hex that how I feel about this reboot all Sony had to do is give us fans Spider-Man 4, I will not waste my hard earn money on this when it comes out two years from now.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs042.snc4/34459_1500400747524_1159345608_31409630_463763_n.jpg (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?op=1&view=all&subj=261213935632&aid=-1&pid=1102838&id=1483437085&oid=261213935632)

[dmxx116]

The setting might change from high school to college.

http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/2008-12-6-motion-captured/posts/breaking-sony-pictures-announces-andrew-garfield-for-spider-man




That's probably why they went with an older actor. This don't make no sense at all they should have done Spider-Man 4 with Maguire and Raimi, And this mistake is going cost them bigtime.

[KCJ506]

This don't make no sense at all they should have done Spider-Man 4 with Maguire and Raimi, And this mistake is going cost them bigtime.

What's the point? Raimi left, Tobey left, the rest of the cast left. Why make a sequel with a new cast & crew? They wouldn't even be able to use the villains from the first 3 films. Except maybe Sandman.

[Webbed-Wonder]

Honestly, I heard nothing but bad news about SM4. Even more script details on it emerged today, I read them on SHH and it sounded pretty terrible. I'm kind of glad we're getting a clean slate, and I loved the first three Spidey movies.

I think he will be a good Spidey, they picked him because he blew them away; so I'm sure most of us will like him as well.

[Superpan]

Ehhh...I'll reserve judgement until the trailer.

[Bloody Marquis]

Ehhh...I'll reserve judgement until the trailer.
Yeah, it'd probably be best to do that. But still, I'm disappointed that Marvel couldn't just go with an actual teenager.

[dmxx116]

Honestly, I heard nothing but bad news about SM4. Even more script details on it emerged today, I read them on SHH and it sounded pretty terrible. I'm kind of glad we're getting a clean slate, and I loved the first three Spidey movies.

I think he will be a good Spidey, they picked him because he blew them away; so I'm sure most of us will like him as well.Well I'm not happy there starting over do we think this reboot will be better then Spider-Man 4 as long that you have Snoy,Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin still making Spider-Man it will never be good again. And Andrew Garfield will make nobody forget Tobey Maguire.

[suss2it]

Well I'm not happy there starting over do we think this reboot will be better then Spider-Man 4 as long that you have Snoy,Avi Arad and Laura Ziskin still making Spider-Man it will never be good again. And Andrew Garfield will make nobody forget Tobey Maguire.Why do you even bother commenting when all you have to say is "Toby Maguire is the greatest Peter Parker ever and anyone else, no matter who will utterly suck as Peter!" and "I hate this movie that's not even in production yet, it must be boycotted, it's gonna suck so bad, I'm not gonna waste my money/time watching it".

Okay we get it you're not gonna watch it and you think it's gonna suck, enough already.

[dmxx116]

Why do you even bother commenting when all you have to say is "Toby Maguire is the greatest Peter Parker ever and anyone else, no matter who will utterly suck as Peter!" and "I hate this movie that's not even in production yet, it must be boycotted, it's gonna suck so bad, I'm not gonna waste my money/time watching it".

Okay we get it you're not gonna watch it and you think it's gonna suck, enough already. I just commenting on what I seen so far from this reboot if you want to see this reboot when it come out in two years that is your choice and I'm not tell you or anybody to boycott the movie.

[Tobias]

I can't say anything bad about the casting choice because I've never seen Garfield in anything to really base an opinion on. I'll wait until we get some production photos/the first trailer before I decide if I'm going to see this or not.

As someone who's currently doing an ongoing Spider-Man fanfic series, I want to see Spidey back on the big screen in one way or another, but I also want it done correctly. I admit, I may go so see this, no matter how terrible it could end up looking, simply because it is Spidey, but I hope we get the best product imaginable.

[Wonderwall]

I just commenting on what I seen so far from this reboot.

Which has been nothing as nothing has been done on the movie. If you can't find anything productive to post it doesn't help to just post for the sake of complaining.

[TMC1982]

I don't like this pic at all with them looking all happy like Spider-Man is going to be the biggest movie in 2012 I don't see it The Avenger, Men in Black 3, Star Trek and Batman 3 and a bunch of other movies will be bigger then the Spider-Man Reboot in 2012 , And hope it fails like Jonah Hex that how I feel about this reboot all Sony had to do is give us fans Spider-Man 4, I will not waste my hard earn money on this when it comes out two years from now.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs042.snc4/34459_1500400747524_1159345608_31409630_463763_n.jpg (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?op=1&view=all&subj=261213935632&aid=-1&pid=1102838&id=1483437085&oid=261213935632)

Seeing that clown, Avi Arad (who helped ruin Spider-Man 3 by forcing Sam Raimi to shoehorn Venom into the picture) in the photo just makes by skin crawl. :sad:

[W.C.Reaf]

I haven't seen Garfield in anything so I can't really comment on his acting abilities. They chose him for a reason I suppose since they were going for a much younger actor at the start.

My first thought about his age was "so they're going to change it to a college setting now?" I suppose the advantage to that setting is not having to cast young experienced actors in the parts. So this move could make the film better..

[Spider-Man]

Bleeding Cool has a nice blurb on by Garfield is a great choice to play a college-aged Peter Parker:

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/07/02/was-andrew-garfield-drawn-by-steve-ditko/

[ToonFaithful]

Changing to a college setting? Spider-Man 4 much?

[The Penguin]

I don't know anything about Andrew Garfield, I just don't understand why after all the talk about moving Peter to high school that they would cast someone about the same age Tobey Maguire was in the first one.

I can only assume they were pretty impressed with him to not eliminate him for being too old.

[underdog]

I don't know anything about Andrew Garfield, I just don't understand why after all the talk about moving Peter to high school that they would cast someone about the same age Tobey Maguire was in the first one.

I can only assume they were pretty impressed with him to not eliminate him for being too old.

So much for getting a teenager to play indeed, by the time this film premieres he'll be 29 years old. And a decade from now, if the studio plans to release a series of films for this reboot, he'll be on the verge of reaching 40.

Even though Toby Maguire played a high schooler, it was only for a portion of the film. By the end of the first film, he was already college bound. . You gotta wonder how old the character Garfield will be playing will be, and if it is college age will it still be believable?

Same here, Garfield is pretty new to me as well. But since Sony and Marvel made this decision together, it seems like they were impressed with his talent abilities, and maybe that's a good thing.

Edit: Also, an interesting tidbit that I realized was that of the finalists who did screen testings, four of the were British. Is it rally that difficult to find American actors these days? I don't have a problem with it, I just found that interesting.

[Spideyzilla]

Changing to a college setting? Spider-Man 4 much?

Shh! Sony doesn't want to know how pointless this movie is!

[Zach]

I won't pass judgment until I see a trailer, but I'm disappointed that Marvel seems to be moving away from the high school direction they seemed to be taking previously. I was hoping for an Ultimate Spider-Man kind of film. What's wrong with casting a teenager to play a teenager?

[Kaveh77]

Jeez it seems like alot of you want this movie to fail :confused: Im hoping that this will be a much better live-action Spider-Man adaptation than the last one.